[Wittrs] To Be Or Not To Become ... A Lobotomite
- From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 06:41:33 -0400
SWM wrote:
>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>that LW later went beyong the TLP is true ... as a vague generality.
>>but, since we are talking specifically about TLP 5.6, the question is
>>whether LW ever transcended this particular insight. can you cite a
>>passage from PI (or any work subsequent to TLP) where (according to
>>you) LW retracts, discredits or disowns TLP 5.6?
>Since I never said anything about the particular citation you gave us,
>except to make the point that, since Wittgenstein left the TLP behind,
>there was little reason to cite material from the TLP to deny or
>disqualify points he made in his later work
I cited TLP 5.6 to disqualify Dennett's eliminative materialism.
your claim is that Dennett does not deny subjective experiences despite
wanting to eliminate any language by which we refer to such experiences.
I reference TLP 5.6 because only a lobotomite would want to eliminate
all references to subjective experiences from a philosophy of
consciousness.
why else would anyone voluntarily contract his world by eliminating all
references to subjective experiences?
Joe
--
Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
==========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
