untermensche
Contributor
Nope, as Nagel points out that's called echolocation. Here he is saying it in the seminal paper you clearly haven't read. Again.
How like a zombie to not be able to conceptualise the difference between vision and echolocation, or recognise the unknowability of the latter.
You have no arguments.
Name dropping is not an argument.
Posting expositions from other people is not an argument.
If you can't explain what you are talking about you have no argument.
And you have no arguments.
Bats navigate quickly and accurately using sound.
That is not possible unless the sound somehow gives you information about your surroundings.
That is called vision. A different kind of vision than we have with our eyes, but a kind of vision none-the-less.
It is not called hearing.
And even if I accept the notion of the person you quoted that actually has ideas then we see vibrating air does one thing in a human and another in a bat. It is not a signal to create a sound.
You have a complete ignorance of evolution if you think an external stimulation can cause a brain to make a specific thing.
There is no connection between vibrating air and sound.
One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.
Sound is just an arbitrary product of the brain experienced by a mind that has a contingent evolutionary association with an external stimulation.
Only a zombie would confuse quoting with name dropping. As for the random redefinition of words, that's just classic zombie.
I note there's still no objective evidence that you have a mind. I'm still waiting.
Quoting with no ideas of your own is worthless.
I can only discuss ideas with people that have at least one.
