[Wittrs] Re: Is "Dualism" a Pejorative Term?

  • From: "gabuddabout" <gabuddabout@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 21:38:09 -0000

Seems that Stuart left out the possibility of a nondualist view as in Searle's 
view which is physicalist but nonreductive.  But that may be because he was 
concerned only to list some possible dualist views.

Think of the hardness of a piston being powerful enough to do things that a 
stick of butter can't.  Now think of some physical systems causing 
consciousness (unlike rocks and unlike functional systems defined in 
second-order-property terms).  Such systems are completely physical but are 
simply more mentally powerful than other things because they can have thoughts.

The remaining issue is scientific in the sense that it may be possible to 
discover how brains cause consciousness, pace P. M. S. Hacker.  And how memory 
works for that matter.

But you don't need to know how brains do it in order to think (and have memory).

Ergo, it is not a good use of time to argue conceptual issues for so long that 
you forget that the whole conceptual issue is cleared up above with just a few 

I could be wrong.  Let some genius enlighten me.

(A nonreducible spade with an ace in the hole thriving on a jazzy riff in some 
Platonic trope world solution in a metamatrix of preestablished linguistic 
harmony, eh mo!!)


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

Other related posts: