2009/8/28 David Nyman <david.ny...@gmail.com>: > Well, I don't think that it is just words, but it can be difficult to > see this because of the heavy freight of association carried by the > standard vocabulary. At root, if one doesn't intuit the 'personal' > (in the most general sense - e.g. Bruno's sense of the 0-personal) as > a) ontological and b) uniquely so, one is still unconsciously > categorising in terms of Descartes' two substances, however the > vocabulary masks this. But perhaps this is what you mean by "just > words"?
Is functionalism monism, property dualism, or might it even be a form of substance dualism? Can a materialist honestly be a monist or is he just a dualist in denial? -- Stathis Papaioannou --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
