[Wittrs] Re: Defining Consciousness -- Can we, and if so what is it?

  • From: "Cayuse" <z.z7@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:22:37 +0100

Stuart wrote:
>If you want to insist that he never rejected such an idea, despite his 
>explicit statements and the direction of his later work, but that he merely 
>added other stuff (while declining to make the case for that when asked to), I 
>guess we've hit a brick wall. Whatever you have in mind by "consciousness", it 
>seems to have little in common with what I have in mind . . . my usages. That 
>we may both use the same words to a certain extent doesn't indicate we have 
>the same things in mind after all or that we are really talking about the same 
>things.


You keep missing the point Stuart. I'm talking about Nagel's use of the word 
consciousness, and how it resonates with some of the text in the TLP, 
regardless of how W changed his views, since this is pertinenet to the question 
you ask in the subject line. If you want to discuss how W changed his views 
then perhaps you should start a thread with a more suitable title.


> If it is unintelligible to speak of how consciousness is produced by brains, 
> on your view, I would humbly suggest that that seems to be a function of the 
> fact that you have something very different than I do in mind by 
> "consciousness". Given that and given our inability to move closer on 
> meanings, I guess there's no sense trying to go on. I tip my hat to you and 
> invite you to continue but I'm afraid I am unlikely at this point to continue 
> with you. 

If Nagel's use of the word consciousness is opaque to you then you're quite 
right to do so.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. wittrs
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2009