[Wittrs] Re: Understanding Dualism
- From: "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:12:48 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "SWM" <SWMirsky@...> wrote:
> responding to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wittrs/message/6197
> SWM:
> I would disagree though if you think that AI folks, in supposing
> the "mental" is strictly computational are positing some kind of
> non-physical process at work.
Whether or not computation is physical is of no importance here. The
point it that it is separated from the physical input (what I called
"process A".
If process A produces what we consider to be intentional
representations, then a good part of the requirements of intentionality
have to be there in process A, whether or not we consider process A
itself to be intentional. If process A is generating representations
that are about the physical world, then something it is doing has to be
about things in the physical world.
The dualistic division leaves that part of the requirements of
intentionality absent from process B. And as long as thinking is said
to occur within process B, that leaves the thinking as without some of
the requirements of intentionality.
Regards,
Neil
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
