[Wittrs] Strawson on Experience and Experiencers

  • From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2010 06:37:05 -0500

Cayuse wrote:

>Joseph Polanik wrote:

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

>There has been no change in my position -- the argument that "there is
>conscious experience, therefore there is an experiencer" is invalid.

as I have reminded you on innumerable previous occasions, *my* argument
is 'I experience; therefore, I am ... an experiencer'.

the argument 'there is conscious experience, therefore there is an
experiencer' is your third person version of my argument --- and you
have indeed abandoned your efforts to prove it is invalid.

>>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.

>The hard problem results from conflating two different language games
>for the word "experience", one which rightly pertains to the physical
>organism and its ability to acquire skills (the experiencer), and one
>which pertains to the existence of the data of conscious experience.

understanding that there are two language games involved may be the
first step in unconflating them; but, the hard problem is grasped when
there are two related games both seen as worth playing.

>>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.

>My use of the word accords with the dictionary definition, so I'll
>stick with it thanks: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/postulate

obviously, you lack experience in the skill of distinguishing an
assumption from a conclusion.



Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware



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

Other related posts: