----- Original Message ----- From: "John Mikes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Marchal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 12:27 PM Subject: Re: Is consciousness real?
> Bruno, it is very amusing to outguess Descartes' reaction if he learned new > stuff. > I have to tell you about my scientific agnosticism: we don't know > everything. > Mind-body (just like consciousness (microtubull?) or emergence, chaos, etc.) > are > items within that agnosticism. The M-B (real say you) problem is a > macrobull: > there is a complexity human, part of the overall complexity of existence in > this universe of ours, it has a physically (physiologically?) identified > aspect, called body and a mental (unidentified?) aspect called mind. > You can (may?) use both but not with a digital brain. > Live well > John M > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Marchal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 10:42 AM > Subject: Re: Is consciousness real? > > > > Jamikes wrote: > > > ... > > >They all make a living on ["consciousness"]. And: > > >Poor old Descartes (I esteem his genius to > > >the highest level) would have > > >made quite different conclusions had he had a > > >freshman's cours of the > > >2000/2001 schoolyear in physiology and > > >biology. (Pineal gland?) > > > > Either he would have remain sort of idol-deistic and then > > he would have substitute pineal gland by microtubul ... > > Or he would have follow its mechanist path, and ... > > ... would be sort of many-worlder :-) > > > > Now that I know that you belief in experiences > > like suffering, I know you belief in consciousness > > which I take minimaly as what is common in all > > experiences like suffering, enjoying, fearing, > > flying, ... > > > > What is called today "the problem of consciousness" is > > just a renaming of Descartes' "mind-body problem". > > I am not sanguin about the word "consciousness", nor > > on any words ... > > > > The mind-body problem is a very concrete one. I mean, > > with the developpement of technology, you can > > imagine some doctor proposing you an artificial digital brain. > > You can forget the word "consciousness" or even "mind". > > But your life, in the most intime way you can apprehend it, > > could depend on answering OK, or NOT OK, to the doctor. > > > > We cannot know the answer but we can reason from > > hypothesis and world conceptions. > > > > Bruno > > >