[Wittrs] The Ontologically Basic Fallacy

  • From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 07:12:56 -0400

SWM wrote:

>Gordon Swobe wrote:

>>SWM wrote:

>>>His CRA depends on a dualistic notion of consciousness.

>>You may think as much, but Dennett certainly does not give us reason
>>to believe it.

>He did in that text I transcribed onto the list. You just have to go
>through his argument there. I have done it in a more streamlined way.
>See below.

>Anyway, Dennett's argument is there. You can say it's wrong but then
>you have to show why. What you can't say is that Dennett "does not give
>us a reason to believe it" because that is just factually incorrect.

>>In the quote that you provided, Dennett *insinuates* but does not
>>actually claim or prove (because he cannot) that Searle's view equates
>>to Cartesian dualism.

>He asks who would believe the CRA's claim that more of the same
>wouldn't make a difference and responds rhetorically that a Cartesian
>dualist would.

yes; but, note that he does not say *ONLY* a Cartesian dualist would
believe that more of the same wouldn't make a difference

>Since the CRA is Searle's argument and no one else's, and Searle
>defends it and obviously finds it convincing, it's pretty clear that
>Dennett is saying that Searle shares the Cartesian dualist conception
>of mind because that's what it takes to swallow the argument.

no. Dennett does not say "that's what it would take". if you find where
he did use that phrase you'd have grounds for saying that Dennett
intended that to say that *only* a Cartesian (C) believes (M) that more
of the same would make a difference: M implies C or M -> C

what Dennett actually said, Stuart, is that a Cartesian would believe M:
C implies M or C -> M

Obviously, Searle believes M. however, to conclude C (that Searle is a
Cartesian) based on what Dennett actually said is the fallacy of
affirming the consequent:

C -> M
(therefore) C



Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware



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

Other related posts: