[Wittrs] Re: Understanding Dualism
- From: "BruceD" <blroadies@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 01:56:37 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "SWM" <SWMirsky@...> wrote:
> I think, Bruce, that you are stuck in the same kind of
> picture of mind as dualists
1. At least I have a picture. You account seems mindless. As you say,
just a variation of matter. Which you then attribute mental properties.
Something like having and not having your mind simultaneously.
2. If Dualism means " there are more phenomena in the universe then
matter", then "YES" I'm a Dualist. But for me, phenomena are not
essentially matter or mind, unless it serves us to say so.
3. We start in a different place. I start with people making sense out
of phenomena by positing that which is matter or mind, making the
distinction when it serves, dropping it when it doesn't. And you start
with identifying some thing called the material brain (matter the to
core) and then ask how it produces mind.
4. For you, the brain makes mind. One causes the other. For me, people
acquire the concepts of mind and matter. And not all concepts can be put
in a causal relation.
I'm short on time and there is so much to read. Hopefully, you don't see
me just selecting text out of context.
> because a brain can be conscious even if deprived of sensory inputs
Again, haven't you agreed that brains are not conscious, only people.
> And yet you talk about "substance" an awful, awful lot!
Because that's how I can make sense out of your position. If don't start
with material substance, what do you start with?
> evidence that brains ARE the cause of them
Quote me where Dehaene says brains cause mind. Sacks quotes
"responsible."
> we might say there's evidence of consciousness in that brain
Meaning that the person is conscious, not that we detect C in some
location.
> Now if a computer were built that had consciousness,
How would we be in any different position than when a baby is born with
consciousness. Because we put C into it. Whereas the baby acquired the
C in some mysterious womb process.
> D found indications that consciousness in the brain is
> a global phenomenon,
Meaning lots parts of the brain are involved. But that doesn't indicate
whether the brain parts produce consciousness the way a candle wick
makes a flame or the brain is an instrument of consciousness the way the
fingers make music on a guitar. This difference haunts philosophy,
bruce
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
