[Wittrs] Strawson on Experience and Experiencers

  • From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 05:34:28 -0500



BruceD wrote:

>Joseph Polanik wrote:

>Bruce wrote.

>>>Which is to say, would you agree, that the relationship between the
>>>experiencer and what is experienced is not causal, but, let's say,
>>>instrumental (in the sense of it suits my purpose to take them to
>>>be)?

>>a lot depends on what you mean by '*what* is experienced'. suppose you
>>look at a red ball. would you say that you experience the physical
>>object that appears to you as a red ball; or, would you say that you
>>experience redness, roundness and so on?

>I would say "I see a red ball." If I had reason to doubt my senses, I
>might question whether it was physical, a illusion, or, perhaps, an
>hallucination. When I'm in my artist frame of mind, I'd might say "I
>experience its redness, etc.". But I wouldn't mean that these
>experiences floated free of an object.

>Does this help with my question?

partially, yes.

arguably, the brain of the experiencer causes or contributes to causing
the experience of redness. however, the experiencer does not cause the
ball to exist.

Joe


--

Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware

@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
      http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@


==========================================

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

Other related posts: