[Wittrs] Re: Variations in the Idea of Consciousness
- From: "jrstern" <jrstern@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:03:26 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@...> wrote:
>
>
> > Isn't this the negative of the fallacy of composition?
>
> > One block is not a pair, therefore two blocks cannot be a pair?
>
> Are you implying that there is something wrong with "one plus one
> equals two"?
I'm not sure that one wants to invoke mereology to explain
addition, but I asking about your case - worrying that you were
excluding such simple cases on whatever basis.
> > I do not mean to trigger a discussion of emergence, but do we
> > really need emergence to uncover all the mysteries of pair-ness?
>
> Whatever might emerge from an assembly of particles usually does
> not emerge by virtue of it being an assembly. Typically,
> something else is going on.
What else is going on to make a pair?
> > Anyway I was taught somewhere in grade school, that intuition is
> > not a valid argument, most especially in scientific matters.
>
> I was not claiming that as an argument. I was only using it as a
> plausible explanation.
"Intuition pumps" can raise questions and perhaps serve as folk tales
or even summaries of more rigorous arguments, but you have to cash
them in before you can assert anything from them.
Josh
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
