SWM wrote: >Joseph Polanik wrote: >>SWM wrote: >>>But, insofar as "understanding" includes what we have often referred >>>to here and elsewhere as being aware of what we are doing in >>>understanding anything, having that sense of subjective recognition, >>>etc., etc. (which is to say having a subjective experience moment >>>with each instance of understanding), Dennett does not deny any of >>>that. >>but, as an eliminative materialist, Dennett is committed to >>eliminating all use of any language that might refer to the subjective >>experience you say he does not deny. >Dennett does not deny experience or that we can talk about it or that, >in talking about it, we can speak of our motives, feelings, beliefs, >desires, thoughts, recollections, afterimages, etc.! What he does is >say we don't have to assume these are bottom line entities in >explaining their occurrence, i.e., that we can explain there occurrence >by describing the processes and functions of brains. Searle says that subjective experiences such as an afterimage have an experiencer-dependent mode of existence; so, for Searle, these are not 'bottom line' entities. Does Dennett admit that subjective experiences have an experiencer- dependent mode of existence; or, does he deny that they have any mode of existence at all? Joe -- Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware @^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@ http://what-am-i.net @^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@ ========================================== Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/