[lit-ideas] Re: Conscious after the fact?
- From: "palma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <palma@xxxxxxxx>
- To: Bev Hogue <hogueb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, cblists@xxxxxxxx, codlloquium@xxxxxxxxxx, David Ritchie <ritchierd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx, Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>, evolutionxary-psychology@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Franz Huber <Fxranz.Huber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, oanderson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Orion Anderson <lixbraryofsocialscience@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, phiddlosop@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx>, wokshevs@xxxxxx, Lit-Ideas <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:37:17 -0400 (EDT)
well, Ben Libet has evidence, it owuld be worthwhile to look at it,
before making a conceptual decision.
The charges of question begging afre precisely that: question begging.
For, if we have made a decision, the phenomenology (what it feels to the
decid"er") may well diverge from what is happening.
Otherwise someone like dr. Freud would be only an idiot (as opposed to
someone who made a mistake).
Suppose someone would reply to Freud: "herr Doktor, your view is not
just false, it is incoherent, and conceptually so, since a desire *is*
what is desired by the person who is aware of it, namely the desire
itself. If I desire ice-cream, I am aware of the desire, and that is
that, it has little or nothing to do with expressing it, in words,
writing, winks, or tongue motions.
Therefore all this Quatsch you produce about unconscious desires, wish,
drives, complex, and we do not knwo what, is obviously not a desire at
all.
QED.
premium for the Vienna fans, can youspot what the fallacy is here?
On Sun,
29 Jun 2008 wokshevs@xxxxxx wrote:
> Quoting John McCreery <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
> > We have known at least since Leibniz's New Essays on Human Understanding
> > that
> > there must be mental processes of which we are unconscious. How else,
> > Leibniz asks, could a ringing bell wake us? We must hear it before we are
> > aware of its sound.
> > Now neuroscientists suggest that we make decisions up to 10 seconds before
> > we are conscious of making them. See
> >
> > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121450609076407973.html?mod=blogs
> >
> > John
>
> Just 2 comments before the big game:
>
> 1. Whenever I hear/read someone preface their claims with "We have known at
> least since ...." I go for my Cragganmore.
>
> 2. Is it that we hear something before being aware of it, or is it the case
> that
> we are able to hear something only if we are aware of it? And is this an
> empirical question or a conceptual one?
>
> (P.S. Self-attributions of "being asleep" may not be all that accurate. Women
> who claim to "sleep through" uninspired lovemaking may simply be telling tall
> tales.)
>
> 3. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can count and
> those
> that cannot. Final comment: there ain't no such thing as "unconscious
> decisionmaking." More specifically/accurately, there can't be, otherwise it's
> not "decisionmaking." Accusations of begging the question at 50 paces.
>
> Unconscious of his real motives for writing but a pillar of moral uprightness
> nonetheless,
>
> Walter O.
> Sigmund Freud Professor of Deontology
> Department of Psychoanalysis und Biological Morality
> University of Vienna, Austria
>
>
>
>
>
> > --
> > John McCreery
> > The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
> > Tel. +81-45-314-9324
> > http://www.wordworks.jp/
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>
off address: #201 West Building
box 90743, Durham, NC 27708
home ph#: [1] 9196881856
cellph#: [1[] 9195997065 (voicemail is available on said numbers)
email palma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
