[Wittrs] Re: Original and derived intentionality
- From: "c.moeller1" <cmoel888@xxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:19:37 -0000
Well said, Neil.
I might add that we (humans) are the causers, including causing
computers to be designed, to be built, and to be programmed, all by
original human intentions, which you may call intentionality. Any
so-called "intentionality" ascribed to inanimate objects such as
computers is merely that lent to them by means of our ingenuity.
Computers stand in for us (one might say, as referent-handlers) and do
our bidding by remote control.
Best regards,
Charlie
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@...> wrote:
--snip--
> My own view, and the one I have been arguing on that older thread,
puts
> people in a rather different position with respect to their relation
to
> the world. I see us as more in the role of the engineers. As I see it,
> we don't just receive inputs. We engineer those inputs ourselves to
suit
> our own needs. We may use off-the-shelf (or off-the-DNA) sensors, but
> we control how those sensors are used and thus we control what our
> inputs are about. Moreover, we monitor our inputs to make sure that
they
> are about what we want them to be about, and we re-engineer their use,
> as needed, to make sure that they continue to provide input that is
> about what we want it to be about. And that's why we have original
> intentionality.
>
> Regards,
> Neil
>
=========================================
Manage Your AMR subscription: //www.freelists.org/list/wittrsamr
For all your Wittrs needs: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
