On 17 February 2010 02:08, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I'm not sure in what sense you mean gratuitous. In a sense it is
gratuitous to describe anything - hence the new catch-phrase, It is what it
is. If one is just a different description of the other then they have the
same
On 17 February 2010 07:28, Diego Caleiro diegocale...@gmail.com wrote:
You guys should Read Chalmers: Philosophy of Mind, Classical and
contemporary Readings
and
Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Richard Rorty
In particular The Concepts of Counsciousness By Ned Block and Mental
On 17 February 2010 02:39, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
My intuition is that once we have a really good 3-p theory, 1-p will seem
like a kind of shorthand way of speaking about brain processes. That
doesn't mean you questions will be answered. It will be like Bertrand
On 16 Feb 2010, at 19:07, David Nyman wrote:
Is consciousness - i.e. the actual first-
person experience itself - literally uncomputable from any third-
person perspective?
There is an ambiguity in you phrasing. I will proceed like I always
do, by interpreting your term favorably,
--- On Mon, 2/15/10, Stephen P. King stephe...@charter.net wrote:
On reading the first page of your paper a thought occurred to me. What
actually happens in the case of progressive Alzheimer’s disease is a bit
different from the idea that I get from the discussion.
Hi Stephen. Certainly,
5 matches
Mail list logo
