[Wittrs] Re: [C] Re: Free Will and Wittgenstein
- From: kirby urner <kirby.urner@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 19:56:52 -0700
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:22 AM, SWM <swmaerske@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I don't know the context of that Wittgenstein excerpt (it's apparently not
> from the PI -- I just checked) but, aside from the fact that it recognizes
> that there is no logical necessity inherent in the physicalist view of minds,
> it is completely out of sync with what we do believe we know today about how
> minds come about and how they work, as the second amply quote demonstrates.
> Absent the context I am loath to judge Wittgenstein's comment but, taken in
> terms of today's knowledge, it looks remarkably wrong. -- SWM
Zettel I think.
"Today's knowledge" is far from settled and many schools of thought
hold forth on what's to be learned from the study of neuroanatomy, and
what analogies to apply.
We have no flashing MRI screen that watches thoughts unfold. That's
still just a cartoon fantasy.
Cognitive science is not a whole lot further along than cartoons in my
book, is more a popularization based on what appeals to a broad
readership.
It's still "wrestling with the paranormal" and all that abysmal
confusion about "the supernatural" -- as if one needed to believe in
such a thing to explain shamanistic practices.
Again, I'm happier with the ethnographers and their approach, than
with that of most philosophers. The latter are not only ethnocentric,
but don't understand Wittgenstein very well, meaning they're not
really that good at philosophy, either.
Kirby
Other related posts:
