Is panprotopsychism really a form of pan-psychism?

turkeyMan

Is panprotopsychism really a form of pan-psychism?

If you read the description of it at first glance it would seem that way but it completely lines up with physicalism or materialism if you really think about it.

Under panprotopsychism "the emergentism problem" is completely solvable.

Description of panprotopsychism:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=panpsychism+explained+%2b+youtube&docid=608021022764434302&mid=D173A3B715D74C777322D173A3B715D74C777322&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

Personally i subscribe to constitutive micropsycism.

panprotopsychism is one of the few if only versions of pan-psycism that really don't belong.

I vote it should be removed. lol.

Basically panprotopsychism allows the emergentism problem to be solved because each different component coming together to form a low level emotional entity or an entity with a lower form of feeling/awereness, it allows this because each component in an of its self according to panprotopsychism does not have feeling/awareness nor emotion of any form. I don't believe this is rational due the opening of Spinoza's "Ethics" and also due to some of the writings of William James. To be honest i have not read much at all of stuff William James wrote. I have read commentaries on People like him.

Questions or Comments?

Pfhorrest

So your argument is that panprotopsychism should not count as a kind of kind of panpsychism because panprotopsychism is actually a plausible view but you want to be able to say that panpsychism isn't and you can't do that if the plausible view is a subtype of the view you want to be implausible?

but it completely lines up with physicalism or materialism if you really think about it. — turkeyMan

Yep, and that's a good thing.

turkeyMan

↪Pfhorrest

ok.

Is panprotopsychism really a form of pan-psychism?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions