[Wittrs] Strawson on Experience and Experiencers

  • From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:45:00 -0500

Cayuse wrote:

>Joseph Polanik wrote:

>>you clearly want to say that there is no experiencer; and, equally
>>clearly, you are unable to explain how there can be experience that is
>>unexperienced by anything;

>There is no experiencer of experience within that experience, and
>neither is there anything within that experience that might implicate
>the existence of an experiencer for the purpose of explanation.
>Postulating an experiencer, then, is of no practical value.

it sounds like you are abandoning your hopeless position --- again.

so be it.

in the event that you ever pause to rethink your position, you might
want to start with two points you've persistently misunderstood.

first, this has nothing to do with the 'hard problem' of explaining how
it happens that there is experience at all. it's about whether one can
draw a conclusion from the fact that there *is* experience.

secondly, there is no postulating of the experiencer. that there is
something which experiences is a conclusion not a postulate. that we can
call that something an experiencer is a choice an act of naming.

Joe


--

Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware

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


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

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

Other related posts: