Hacker News Reader

Comment by perl4ever | Hacker News Reader

It seems to me excruciatingly obvious that either human consciousness does not involve the ability to interpret analogies or else humans are not generally conscious.

This is based on observing innumerable vehement and apparently unresolvable disagreements on the internet over whether a given analogy is valid, particularly in the realm of politics.

View on HN

...don’t use internet discussion to draw conclusions about consciousness. It’s just not credible.

As this is an internet discussion, accepting your opinion leads to a paradox as I would be doing what you say not to.

When someone tells you to not trust them, take them at their word - Maya Angelou (paraphrase)

One trick of human mind is the ability to work with fuzzy definitions. You can spawn infinite and unresolvable disagreement on the Internet over the true meaning of the word "chair", and yet everyone can use that word correctly in their lives.

Want to bet? Try to get people to agree whether they should use "chair" or "chairman/chairwoman"...or for that matter "chairperson".

They are all correct in the appropriate context. The problem is not the usage and understanding; it is the drive for certainty and absoluteness which ignores the contexts and multiple realities we inhabit.

that's taxonomy not analogy?

Claiming an analogy isn't valid is not the same thing as being unable to interpret them; it's actually one step past interpreting them.

One only has to work in IT security for a relatively short span to see ample evidence that humans are not generally concious.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com