[Wittrs] Re: Dennett's Intentional Stance
- From: "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:30:16 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "BruceD" <blroadies@...> wrote:
> The Dennett quoted above doesn't sound like the Dennett presented
> here.
It's the same Dennett.
> And just what is he demystifing?
He is attempting to demystify intentionality. Those who see it as a
bit of a mystery, including Searle, distinguish between original
intentionality and derived intentionality. It is original
intentionality that is taken to be mysterious. In "The Intentional
Stance", Dennett is arguing that there is only derived intentionality,
so there is no mystery.
> I say he is questioning the need to view consciousness as either
> the manifestation of some spirit or the causal end-product of a
> neurological event.
He is not discussing all of consciousness in that book. He is
concerned only with intentionality (aboutness) which is usually seen as
one aspect of consciousness. He is taking the position that
intentionality is nothing more than attribution. That's a position
often taken by AI people.
Regards,
Neil
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
