[Wittrs] Re: When is "brain talk" really dualism?
- From: "blroadies" <blroadies@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:00:37 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Stuart W. Mirsky" <SWMirsky@...> wrote:
> We NEVER see inside anyone else's subjectivity
Not because it is hidden away but because there is no inside.
> > But why assume that the explanation must take the form of the brain
generating it?
> Your own example of driving under the influence answers that one.
It does? Driving under the influence is like driving with one hand, it
presents difficulty for a person, not for a brain. One only makes sense
out of this by starting with a person and bringing in the brain as a
limiting factor. That is not what you mean by "cause." Causes are
mediated by other causes. But you have causes mediated by a Person which
itself is not an object that can stand in a causal relationship
> First off, I start with people
and then you look for where your brain has caused you? Where do you
look? And is th elooking caused? Your brain causes your mind to look for
your brain and then concludes the brain caused you the looker?
bruce
,
Other related posts:
