Protection So what happened Dang it We were doing good we had made so much progress I could already imagine all the accolades that were going to be heaped on me by the Wikipedia community for singlehandled brokering a peace deal only to see all my wonderful career as a diplomat going up in flames on Feb 3 Guess I m not ready to tackle the Israel Palestine peace accord just yet Oh well don t count your barnstars before they re hatched So let s do the postmortem Forgive me if you re explained some of this somewhere above the amount of discussion this has generated is quite difficult to wade through The Discussed Issues not in same order as above posts The Block 1995 Quote I disagree with Alienus I don t think the pre print status makes it unquotable I know technically that s a rule I read somewhere but still If we decide we like the quote with one email we could verify it I don t overwhelmingly object to the quote it is factual but isn t it just Block quoting Dennett about what we re already quoted him Materalism vs Physicalism I personally see nothing in Dennet s definition that makes me think he is using the technical matter only version of materialism I don t know that I ve ever personally bumped into anyone who used that sense but then i m not a philosopher by trade The most common name for the physicalism philosphy is materialism even more common than the word physicalism Do you really think Dennett believes in at type of Cartesian physicalism that there really is someplace within in the brain where it all comes together but that that place just involves electricity and or quantum effects Seriously I m very sympathetic to wanting to get your opinion in I realize the article as it current stands is VERY pro Dennett and I definitely want to get around to all the arguments both against dennett s reasoning for CM and for dualism Truth be told I hate Dennett s take on consciousness BUT do you really think Dennnett believes in Cartesian Physicalism but not Cartesian Materialism That there s some place in the brain where everything is stored but since it uses ENERGY instead of just pure matter it s not TECHINCALLY materialism If you sincerely believe that then I m do apologize for not gettting into it here Representationalism Why the war on this one Do we really believe Cartesian Materialism is NOT a kind of Representationalism Do we just disagree that the definition overly equates Representationalism with CM or do we just stylistically believe the article shouldn t get into that The plenum quote I thought we agreed that it wasn t a good candidate for this page and maybe belonged better on Dennett or some other page I see it s re entered into the edit war About Global Workspace theory don t throw something that big in without talking about it not in a truce as finicky as this Furthermore Arguments FOR CM go in the Arguments For section yes For all the arguments we have for CM being made on the talk page the section the go in is sparse I m not going to sort through all the edits to find out what happened to it but there was a really super straw man sentence that was part of the compromise for using Dennett s definition If you guys both agree it was bad by all means take it out but the term Straw Man argument comes up a LOT in discussioning CM O O have a review of some of the straw man accusations in the intro to their paper and it seems like a good part of a compromise The Important Things NOTHING another person can do on wikipedia justifies incivility or personal attacks NOTHING You don t just hurt the other person you hurt the whole project Editors come and see all the hateful comments and they think I don t want to be involved with this project this is an angry place and if I say anything people are just going to undo my changes and be mad at me Rudeness doesn t just hurt you two it hurts the whole project No amount of provocation can ever justify it And there have been some HORRIBLE insults in this war Nothing can justify more than 3 reverts in one day Every revert is one more revert that pops up on recent changes and when people like me get back to the debate it s impossible to make sense out of the mess Here s how it works You make a change Someone reverts it you STOP and argue about it on talk Instead you two have had 49 frickin edits reverts since the last time i was looking at this article and the article isn t one sentence different Insanity Now that the page is protected I d suggest you both consider that the equivalent of a ban on editing any pages on this subjects Dennett Multiple Drafts Conscio