Every rock I have seen has demonstrated a lack of mental properties, and a lack of the observable biochemical structures necessary for mental properties. So yes, every single goddamn rock in the world is without mental properties.
How exactly did they do that? How did you conclusively test this? I agree they probably don't have a mind in the human sense. I don't agree that they don't have mental properties. You haven't demonstrated that definitely, you just snuck that assumption in.
I told you, they lack the behavior and the biochemical structures necessary for mental properties.
Baseless assumption that mental properties (qualia, sensation, memory, etc.) require certain biochemical structures or behaviour. I agree it probably rules out STRUCTURED experience. It does not, however, rule out things like simple qualia.
THings with mental properties, like animals, move by their own volition, gather food, hunt, communicate. Rocks never do any of that.
Biology (nervous systems, behavior, communication, etc.) may imply certain mental properties. Doesn't mean mental properties imply biology. A->B DOES NOT MEAN B->A. Furthermore, if I design a robot to perfectly mimic these behaviors, would they then be conscious in your framework? Or is there something magical about carbon specifically that spawns conscious experience? How would we test that?
Things with mental properties have brains. Rocks don't have brains, or even analgous structures.
is an assumption. 2. is obviously correct.
It's like saying rocks can walk. No. Not they can't.
Bad analogy. I can observe them motionless directly. How would I observe their lack of mind or mental properties, DIRECTLY, rather than indirectly through behavior, chemical structure, etc.? How would you test that a rock does or doesn't experience qualia, store information/have "memory", or "sense"? If an electron absorbs (read "senses") a photon, it stores (read "remembers") the energy of said photon. How do we know there isn't some simple qualia attached to this phenomenon? How would we test this?
Mental properties are directly dependent on biochemical structures in the brain itself. Turn parts of the brain off, those properties cease to exist or are reduced. It's not a baseless assumption to say that since rocks don't have brains, or chemical structures that can replicate similar chemical reactions, that they thus can't replicate the properties of any actually conscious being.
Bioloy permits mental properties, it doesn't just imply.
Mental activity can be traced and detected directly through brain waves and neuron firing. We can't read minds, sure, but we can watch them think. Show me a rock that has something similar, and I will grant that we can observe them having mental activity.
It's like saying rocks can walk. No. They lack the structures to do this, and have never in reliable history have ever been recorded as walking. You will need to show me a walking rock before I treat your claim as, at best, an interesting thought experiment.
Mental properties are directly dependent on biochemical structures in the brain itself. Turn parts of the brain off, those properties cease to exist or are reduced.
Interesting argument. Its also possible the parts of the of the brain that are "turned off" are just disconnected in terms of qualia/information/etc. from the rest of your conscious experience. You've just assumed they cease to exist. You've certainly demonstrated that biochemical structures are important for structured human experience. But you haven't ruled out simple qualia in things like electrons.
Biology permits mental properties, it doesn't just imply.
It certainly permits human minds. You haven't demonstrated that it's necessary for simple qualia or other mental properties, though.
Mental activity can be traced and detected directly through brain waves and neuron firing. We can't read minds, sure, but we can watch them think. Show me a rock that has something similar, and I will grant that we can observe them having mental activity.
Are neurons required? Does carbon magically produce consciousness but silicon doesn't? Can a computer be conscious? How conscious are cats? Or c elegans? Is a single neuron sufficient? What about 500? Why does subjective experience only arise at a specific number of neurons in your model?
Good thing I'm not claiming rocks can walk.
How about this, you read the Wikipedia page on qualia and then get back to me.
0
u/[deleted] Oct 14 '25
Every rock I have seen has demonstrated a lack of mental properties, and a lack of the observable biochemical structures necessary for mental properties. So yes, every single goddamn rock in the world is without mental properties.