[Wittrs] Dualism Cooties: Background Issues

  • From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 13:15:51 -0500

SWM wrote:

>The point of the work of some, like Dennett, on the other hand, is to
>develop a theory that works with the science we currently have, what we
>currently know about how things in the universe work.

>Dennett's thesis could be wrong and that is its strength. His whole
>model could fail to achieve the objectives set for it. But that can't
>happen when you argue over Leibnizian monadism and Cartesian dualism
>and so on and so forth. Philosophy needn't be and, indeed, shouldn't be
>about endless argumentation geared to logical proofs and such. It needs
>to be descriptive and supportive of what is known or studied in other
>disciplines.

take your own advice. be supportive of the following fact: the
Dennett's theory of consciousness can't possibly be correct unless von
Neumann is wrong about quantum mechanics.

Joe


--

Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware

@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
      http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@


==========================================

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

Other related posts:

  • » [Wittrs] Dualism Cooties: Background Issues - Joseph Polanik