[Wittrs] Re: Ontologically Basic Ambiguity: Mode of Existence
- From: "gabuddabout" <gabuddabout@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 19:43:54 -0000
Stuart writes:
"Searle's CRA depends on the notion that the understanding MUST be a feature of
a particular constituent process and completely disregards the possibility that
it might be a systemwide funcion."
So, we are to take "particular constituent process" to be nonidentical in
content with "systemwide function."
I didn't know earlier how to create such ice-cutting distinctions so as to show
Searle the error of his CR ways!
Perhaps it is a mereological fallacy of Searle's to speak of a "particular
constituent process" rather than a "systemwide function" as the possible causer
of consciousness?
Or perhaps the use of "systemwide function" is a dangler with a lure of fake
bait?
Perhaps this loose-speak is Janus-faced?
So many forks! Wanna spoon?!
Cheers,
Budd
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
