faer — TheMadFool
intuitions — Pfhorrest
faer — TheMadFool
Is this some neologism for "their"? — Pfhorrest
I suppose it's a clear case of a clash between intuitions rather than the "more common" intuition vs reason scenario everyone, invariably, suspects. — TheMadFool
What clash? I think that ↪Pfhorrest is right, and that our everyday intuition tells us that both your sister’s mind and your sister’s body are parts of your sister. By the way, there’s a rather funny story about the basic idea of the topic at hand in Fifth Contact concerning the characters Bannon and Vree — Tristan L
A person is not their body but a person is not their mind either, they are their consciousness — Judaka
If somehow my consciousness was swapped to another body with a new brain, let's say this new brain is genius and I attain their mental capabilities rather than that of my old brain, "I" would still refer to the consciousness, "I" have gained a new body and "I" have gained a new mind. — Judaka
No, I think I was pretty clear that the body with my sister's brain I would never have sex with.So, it's just a matter of time before you start having sex with both your sister and your wife then? — TheMadFool
Hm. I never meant or said that. 1) I made a distinction about the REASONS one would be reluctant (and in one case unwilling) to have sex. It is not the same kind of reluctance. In one my attraction would likely still be there for the body of my wife, but since I know (have an idea) it would be my sister experiencing sex with me, I don't want that to happen. In the other case I am seeing my sister's body, so even though it is my wife, I have lived all my life with this as a taboo, being attracted to that body is a taboo (this all seems very familiar to me, but I'll write it again.) One of these two, for me could change. I could over time deal with my wife's essence being in a body that was my sisters. I would NEVER get over knowing that inside what before was my wife's body there is my sister experiencing through it. I would never have sex with that body. 2) I also raised the issue that our minds are not just our brains. And I mean even if you are a complete physicalist, it does not makes sense to just ignore the neuronal complexes in the heart and gut, and also to ignore the endocrine system. These radically affect personality and sense of self.You speak of emotional aspects which I'll take to mean, all things considered, just the process of, as people say, getting used to the the cards that were dealt to you. That's all I could gather from your post. — TheMadFool
The "problem" simply has more to do with sexuality than anything else, as I said, you've chosen a poor example. I don't care to go into that topic. — Judaka
Hm. I never meant or said that. 1) I made a distinction about the REASONS one would be reluctant (and in one case unwilling) to have sex. It is not the same kind of reluctance. In one my attraction would likely still be there for the body of my wife, but since I know (have an idea) it would be my sister experiencing sex with me, I don't want that to happen. In the other case I am seeing my sister's body, so even though it is my wife, I have lived all my life with this as a taboo, being attracted to that body is a taboo (this all seems very familiar to me, but I'll write it again.) One of these two, for me could change. I could over time deal with my wife's essence being in a body that was my sisters. I would NEVER get over knowing that inside what before was my wife's body there is my sister experiencing through it. I would never have sex with that body. — Coben
minds are not just our brains — Coben
The question is this: if you now had to choose whom to live with, do you opt to stay with your wife's body with X's brain/mind in it or would you rather stay with X's body with your wife's brain/mind in it? Is it mind/brain OR body that defines a person? — TheMadFool
I’d say the mind, and I’d most probably stay with the one who has my wife’s mind. However, more importantly, I’d hunt for the mad scientist or thoughtcaster (philosopher) who exchanged the women’s brains or minds and try to make him or her set things right again — Tristan L
hopefully you're a man — TheMadFool
Who would be you, then? Y with your mind/brain in it or your body with Y's mind/brain in it? — TheMadFool
Which body (yours with Y's brain/mind or Y's with your mind/brain) would you prefer had sex with your wife? — TheMadFool
genes — Tristan L
How people, perhaps this is an old-fashoined attitude, now outmoded, used to care about their ancestral lines. — TheMadFool
some perhaps are much, much older than some modern African nations. — TheMadFool
Sad that they seem to have missed out on an important truth - that the bodies are, under some interpretations, merely vessels for the mind.
Oh! And Physicalism seems to accommodate a gene-based perspective of mind/brain. — TheMadFool
Well, it certainly isn’t old-fashioned or outmoded for me :smile: — Tristan L
But aren’t all lineages equally old, namely billions of years? (I’m splitting hairs on purpose here.) But purposeful over-exact interpretation aside, the African nations that you have in mind don’t include the Khoisan, right — Tristan L
For me, a science-believing platonist, I see things as follows: The ultimate “spark” of the mind, the mind itself, is abstract and thus immaterial, but when in the temporal world, it needs a body to reckon (compute) and process info in a similar way that a mathematician with very little memory needs pencil and paper to do proofs, or an office worker needs a computer. So I think that while the real ID (thisness, heccaeity) is abstract, much of what we think is part of us, such as our inclinations, memories, and smartness, are bodily to a big part, and part of these are in the genes. That’s why I think that forebear-lines are weighty. — Tristan L
That's probably because you can trace your line back to a King or a Queen, a Duchess, a Count. — TheMadFool
My descendants, for certain, won't be happy to see my portrait hanging on their family tree. :grin: — TheMadFool
You've made so many assumptions there to fill all the containers in a cargo ship. :joke: — TheMadFool
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.