[Wittrs] Re: Dualism Cooties: Classifying Searle

  • From: "College Dropout John O'Connor" <sixminuteabs@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:42:19 -0500


Gordon Swobe wrote on Sat, 13 March 2010 20:35
> Searles defies classification:
> 
> "There are not two (or five or seven) fundamental ontological categories,
> rather the act of categorization itself is always interest relative. For 
> that reason the attempt to answer such questions as, 'How many fundamental 
> metaphysical categories are there?', as it stands, is meaningless. We live 
> in exactly one world and there are as many different ways of dividing it as 
> you like." 
> 
> - Searle, "Why I Am Not Property Dualist"



Why divide the world at all?  Isn't that a division of the self from the world? 
 It seems like any division could be called dualism.

Wittgenstein's beetle in the box thought experiment is extremely versatile.  
There is the obvious, that it is speaking of senselessness of internal things, 
and the very concept of consciousness comes to mind as an exemplar or that 
senselessness.  It could be turned inside-out and be used on other notions, 
such as what lies outside the universe.  And, if used in both manners, what 
division is there to make?
-- 
He lived a wonderful life.
==========================================

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

Other related posts: