[Wittrs] Re: Dancing Dualisms: Searlean Moves and Cartesian Moves--P's @ K's

  • From: "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 00:41:09 -0000

--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "gabuddabout" <wittrsamr@...> wrote:

> One could turn the "tables," however, by arguing thusly:

I'm not sure who you would be turning the tables on.  I am not  a
proponent of computationalism.

> Ergo 6., Strong AI is a form of vitalism given ...

That's implausible.  Using vitalism that way would suggest that
computation is a form of life, and that is already implausible.  Whether
AI implies dualism, I will leave for others to argue.  Since I do not
advocate computationalism, it does not concern me  one way or the other.

> 2. The research program Searle prefers as getting at how brains cause
> consciousness is modelled on the germ theory of disease. First find
> NCCs (neurobiological correlates of consciousness), then hunt for
> causal mechanisms.

However, Searle is not proposing to do such research himself - he  seems
to be using that just to sweep the problems under the rug.  Incidently,
I am doubtful that the NCC approach can settle the  question of


Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

Other related posts: