[Wittrs] Re: Strawson on Experience and Experiencers

  • From: "Cayuse" <z.z7@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 11:56:55 -0000

Joseph Polanik wrote:
unless you can show that there is experience that is unexperienced
by anything at all, experience implies an experiencer.

Cayuse replied:
I can't even show that there is experience, let alone qualify that
experience, and neither can you. Your conclusion is therefore in
error.

Joseph Polanik replied:
you've previously admitted that there is experiencing; in particular,
experiencing an afterimage. are you revising your position? if so,
how?

There's no "admission" to make -- that there is conscious experience is not open to question. It is the logical argument that "there is experience, therefore there is an experiencer" that is questionable. There is no more need to postulate an experiencer for an afterimage than there is to postulate an experiencer for the initial image -- these are just part of the data that constitute conscious experience.
==========================================

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

Other related posts: