[Wittrs] Ugh, correction re: Searle's CRA and its Implications

  • From: "SWM" <SWMirsky@xxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:50:33 -0000

Below that should have read ". . . but, running together in an
interactive way, do."

I should have typed "inTERactive" rather than "inactive" which would have the 
precise opposite result of what I was trying to describe!

I guess I was typing too fast (like one of Searle's automatons in a CR!) rather 
than with sufficient attention to what was appearing on screen!

SWM


--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "SWM" <SWMirsky@...> wrote:

<snip>

>
> The reason it's underspecked is because Searle is caught in a dualist picture 
> of mind, i.e., he cannot see how understanding (and other characteristics of 
> consciousness) could be effected as features of a complex system of processes 
> which, individually, have none of these features but, running together in an 
> inactive way, do.
>
> But if you think the different iteration of the CRA you've provided has an 
> impact on the argument I've made, how so?
>
> SWM
>
> =========================================
> Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
>


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

Other related posts:

  • » [Wittrs] Ugh, correction re: Searle's CRA and its Implications - SWM