[Wittrs] Re: Mind´s role in science, and mental terms in causal statements

  • From: "gerardoprim" <gerardoprim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:06:17 -0000

(Stuart) I've already explained, numerous times, the sense in which I am using 
"causal" and why it is perfectly appropriate. There is no point in demanding a 
particular meaning when you know 1) precisely how I am using it and 2) that I 
am fully prepared to use another term if we can agree on it.
(Gerardo) So do I. Don«t misunderstand my purpose. I«m not trying to impose you 
any usage, I«m trying to clarify the different usages. If you want to use the 
searlean broad sense of the term, that«s ok, as long as we remember that it«s 
the serlean sense and not the sense used by most scientists, and that it«s also 
legitimate to explore the differences with the usual sense of the term, as I«ve 
tried to do in my post. You can say ÒI«m not interested in that sense, I«m only 
interested in exploring the serlean usageÓ (but in such case, I guess that 
exploring the differences and similarities between both usages could be 
clarifying for both of us), or you can say ÒI«m interested in that sense too, 
but I disagree with your claims about itÓ (but in such case, I«d like to know 
your specific disagreements with my claims).

(Stuart) I thought I had offered my criticisms twice already, no? All right, 
I'll try to find time to do it again.
(Gerardo) I think you«d answered only once, then I expressed you that I didn«t 
understand your criticism, and you said you would argue again if other 
oportunity was presented.

Regards,
Gerardo.

Other related posts:

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