Document Mentions (3 shared documents)

EFTA00710448

2 mentions1 same-page

Page ?Same page

" are all confused now, "we" will all be confused in the future. What kind of scientist would accept a proposition like that? From: > on behalf of Brad Bartholomew ‹ > Sent: 21 July 2016 03:11:04 To: Subject: Re: SV: [Sadhu Sanga] Consciousness Dear Soren & Witt I think most scientists would agree with the pr

"? What do you do with a depressed state? Mood is depressed, the content is irrelevant. And what does intension have to do with a depressed state? AL MD On Jul 23, 2016, at 10:22 PM, < wrote: A very interesting and simulating discussion thread regarding consciousness. Perhaps we will all "know" th

EFTA00821616

2 mentions1 same-page

Page ?Same page

we" are all confused now, "we" will all be confused in the future. What kind of scientist would accept a proposition like that? From on behalf of Brad Bartholomew ‹ > Sent: 21 July 2016 03:11:04 To: Subject: Re: SV: [Sadhu Sanga] Consciousness Dear Soren & Witt I think most scientists would agree with the pr

EFTA00821662

2 mentions1 same-page

Page ?Same page

e" are all confused now, "we" will all be confused in the future. What kind of scientist would accept a proposition like that? From: on behalf of Brad Bartholomew ‹ > Sent: 21July 2016 03:11:04 To Subject: Re: SV: [Sadhu Sanga] Consciousness Dear Soren & Witt I think most scientists would agree with the prop

"? What do you do with a depressed state? Mood is depressed, the content is irrelevant. And what does intension have to do with a depressed state? AL MD On Jul 23, 2016, at 10:22 PM, < > wrote: A very interesting and simulating discussion thread regarding consciousness. Perhaps we will all "know"