[Wittrs] Re: Searle meets Mary

  • From: "gabuddabout" <gabuddabout@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:35:54 -0000


--- In WittrsAMR@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Gordon Swobe <wittrsamr@...> wrote:
>
> Consider Frank Jackson's story about Mary the color scientist as it relates 
> to Searle:
>
> While living in a black & white room, Mary the scientist learns every 
> possible physical fact about the color red and about the perception of red in 
> the brain. She then leaves her room and sees the color red for the first time.
>
> Property dualists might say that upon seeing red for the first time, Mary 
> acquires new knowledge of something non-physical.
>
> Let us say that Mary embraces property dualism for that reason. She concludes 
> that because she knew everything physical about red and its perception, and 
> because she learned something new when she finally saw the color red, that 
> matter must have non-physical properties.
>
> I wonder how Searle would respond to Mary. In my reading of Searle I do not 
> see how he might answer. Anyone?
>
> -gts


Searle should dispute the premise that contains "every physical fact."

Presumably, my seeing red is also a physical fact.  Conceptual dualists may 
whine, though.  But so what?

The hardness of a piston does work at a system level and the consciousness of a 
brain allows for meaningful traffic signals.

I suppose one can all the facts (physical ones) without the fact that some red 
light means to stop.  Ergo, there is more to the world than is found in physics.

I don't think that follows but may be a paralogism of reason or some such.

Cheers,
Budd





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

Other related posts: