[Wittrs] Re: When is "brain talk" really dualism?

  • From: "swmaerske" <SWMirsky@xxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 06 Sep 2009 01:52:07 -0000

Cayuse, I've been away for a day and, coming back, I don't see that we're 
really getting anywhere. Just going over the same old stuff. Unless there's 
some new angle, something each of us hasn't said about this and thinks he needs 
to say, I think we should just leave this discussion where it has already 
ground to a halt. I am talking about what brains do insofar as they generate 
the mental features we associate with having a mind, being a subject. You are 
talking about a metaphysical notion of subjectness as the ground of everything, 
the all. We are just talking about different things. I agree with you that 
there is nothing science can do with your issue and you seem to agree with me 
that there is something science can do with mine. What more needs to be said? 
-- SWM


--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Cayuse" <z.z7@...> wrote:
>
> swmaerske wrote:
> > "Cayuse" wrote:
> >> Stuart wrote:
> >>> You want to use "subjective experience" to reference an idealist
> >>> picture of the mind
> >>
> >> Wrong on two counts. Firstly I'm not making any claims about mind,
> >> but about what some want to call "subjective experience". Secondly,
> >> your assumption of idealism is the kind of metaphysics that I'm
> >> rejecting here. If you wish to uphold a claim for idealism then you'll
> >> have to present your argument.
> >
> > I've already responded nearby. But here is the relevant portion from
> > that post:
> >
> > If mind is not explainable as a function of the physical then it must
> > either co-exist in what would, at minimum, be a dualist world or it
> > must be the only real existent with the physical a mere illusion (an
> > idealist world) or, as you and Bruce have argued (albeit for markedly
> > different reasons) we must grind to a screeching halt and simply
> > acknowledge a mystery, that something about the world, namely minds,
> > is unexplainable. . .
>
> I haven't said anything about mind, but I'll take you to be arguing against
> my view of what Nagel called the "what it is like" and what some want to
> call "subjective experience". My argument is that explanation must end
> somewhere, and this is where it reaches its limit. It makes no sense, then,
> to claim that "it must either co-exist in what would, at minimum, be a
> dualist world or it must be the only real existent with the physical a mere
> illusion (an idealist world)".
>
> It is no mystery, to me at least, that explanation comes to an end
> somewhere. The perceived problem is specious.
>
>
> >> If you think you can divorce your idea of consciousness from Nagel's
> >> idea of "what it is like" then please go ahead.
> >
> > Already done nearby but to make this easier, here's the relevant
> > portion of THAT post again -
> >
> > I am speaking of consciousness as being the agglomeration of features
> > of subjective experience we recognize in ourselves (and in others)
> > including but not limited to:
> >
> > Being aware (consists of a complex of things, some of which are seen
> > below)
> >
> > Distinguishing self from non-self (a form of awareness, of course)
> >
> > Having intentionality (the capacity to think ABOUT things)
> >
> > Comprehending (the capacity to recognize and link different
> > representations within various picturing and mapping systems in order
> > to make constructive new links to form other pictures and maps)
> >
> > Intelligence (the capacity to operate in the world with foresight,
> > e.g., thinking ahead, guessing right, etc.)
> >
> > Thinking (the capacity to have ideas, mental images and the
> > connections that link them)
> >
> > Picturing/mapping (the capacity to construct, retain and utilize
> > complex representations of the inflowing stimuli we get)
> >
> > Perceiving (awareness of the stimuli we get, consisting of our
> > sensory inputs)
> >
> > Memory (the capacity to store and pull up specific thoughts, images,
> > scenarios, behaviors and put them back into use)
> >
> > These certainly don't exhaust the features I think we find in our
> > consciousness and it may also be the case that many of them are
> > aspects of others in this list rather than stand-alones. It's also
> > possible that some are more basic than others and that for the less
> > basic ones to occur we need the more basic ones, etc. Certainly, the
> > model of the mind I think is best presumes that some very basic
> > (non-mindlike) algorithmic functions must be performed in order to
> > get the less basic features listed above though I'm not at all sure
> > how these layered processes and features fit together. But it seems
> > to me that mind is conceivable in precisely this way.
> >
> > None of this, however, has anything directly to do with the idea that
> > what we know (either conceptually or perceptually) is all of a piece
> > with the knowing subject [what you are pushing], which is a very
> > different notion and irrelevant to the model of consciousness I think
> > makes the most sense . . .
>
> Included in your list above are the words 'experience' and 'awareness'. It
> would be helpful if you could say how you are using these words and how
> their respective uses differ.
>
>



Group Home Page: http://seanwilson.org/wittgenstein.discussion.html
Group Discussion Board: http://seanwilson.org/forum/
Google Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/Wittrs
FreeList Archive: //www.freelists.org/archive/wittrs
FreeList for September: //www.freelists.org/archive/wittrs/09-2009
FreeList for August: //www.freelists.org/archive/wittrs/08-2009
Group Creator's Page: http://seanwilson.org/
Today's Messages: 
http://seanwilson.org/forum/index.php?SØ86f18704524b9992bac8164354cd96&SQ=0&t=mnav&rng=1&rng2=0&u?400&forum_limiter=&btn_submit¾gin+Search
Messages From Last 3 Days: 
http://seanwilson.org/forum/index.php?SØ86f18704524b9992bac8164354cd96&SQ=0&t=mnav&rng=3&rng2=0&u?400&forum_limiter=&btn_submit¾gin+Search
This Week's Messages: 
http://seanwilson.org/forum/index.php?SØ86f18704524b9992bac8164354cd96&SQ=0&t=mnav&rng=7&rng2=0&u?400&forum_limiter=&btn_submit¾gin+Search
Yahoo Archive: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wittrs;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMzg0Z3FnBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI4NjkzODY5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTYzMjIyNwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzEyNTE4NDE4MDc-

Other related posts: