[Wittrs] Is Homeostasis the Answer? (Re: Variations in the Idea of Consciousness)
- From: "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 04:57:39 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "BruceD" <blroadies@...> wrote:
> There are two issues here.
> 1- Physical substances: Are there "features" of mind (to use Stuart's
> term) that are not physical? Since Stuart has the physical brain
> causing mind, he must call all mental features physical, in order
> to retain Monis,
My inclination is to say that the mind is an abstraction, rather than a
physical thing.
> So, biological adaptation would be mechanical but social adaption
> would be purposive.
It is not mechanical in the same way that an automobile is mechanical.
Where to draw the line on "purposive" is a bit harder than where to
draw it on "mechanical."
> An example: My brain causes me to be in pain. I keep the pain to
> myself because complaining serves no purpose, as I see it. If my
> brain causes me not to complain, then I'm not acting with purpose,
> because "I" drops out of the account.
I don't care for that way of talking. It seems to me that it is you,
not the brain, that is causing you not to complain.
I think that you agree with me on that, while Stuart disagrees.
Regards,
Neil
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
