IE, the mind is not a cause of a new state of affairs, the "mind" is no more than a word used in language to describe the state of the brain that causes a new state of affairs. — RussellA
The mind exists only as a part of language, not as part of the world — RussellA
As if an abstract non-entity can be a force — Mww
The mind an abstract non-entity? — Raymond
What's 'an entity'? The definition is 'a thing with distinct and independent existence.' But the mind is not a thing, not an entity, not an object of any kind. Nevertheless, its reality is indubitable, as it is the pre-condition for speaking, writing and thinking or any kind of conscious activity. — Wayfarer
Why can't the mind be a non-material thing contained in matter? — Raymond
Got an example of a non-material thing? — Wayfarer
I don't think you can plausibly explain the elements of judgement in terms of physical interactions. — Wayfarer
We already have electronic devices that can recognize faces or other objects and act on that recognition. Or perform complicated logical operations and defeat humans in games like chess and go — litewave
That can be measured. As for the fact that we don't know what it really is, maybe we don't know what anything 'really is'.the charge in particles. — Raymond
both of which are extensions of human sensibility, artifacts manufactured and programmed for just this purpose. — Wayfarer
Can you imagine? Evolution sweating buckets while programming our behavior? Human behavior is not programmed, though it certainly can look so. — Raymond
That can be measured. As for the fact that we don't know what it really is, maybe we don't know what anything 'really is'. — Wayfarer
When we watch the sunset we're aware of the colours, the sounds, the wildlife, the trees, the clouds in the sky, our feelings, the thoughts in our mind, all as elements of a subjective whole, of watching the sunset. It's indubitable that I am a subject of that experience and that the experience is unified; I don't receive signals from my sensory organs in the third person and then work on integrating them. I see, hear, smell, feel, and reflect. The mind is integrating the data into a sense of aesthetic appreciation. — Wayfarer
I only used the compounded terminology because that was how it was originally presented. All experience is subjective, in that any experience belongs only to the rational agent that reasons to it, therefore “subjective experience” is superfluous.
I reject the concept of “qualia” outright, as superfluous as well, insofar as the given senses of them are already accounted for in established metaphysics. That is not to say they are false, or don’t have their own predication, but only that such predication has earlier, and better, representation. — Mww
On a representationalist view, there is a separation of (subjective) experience from the (objective) world. The subjective experience has to be synthesized from the signals coming from the environment. Hence the binding problem.
Whereas on a non-representationalist view, what we perceive just is the world (which we have attendant thoughts and feelings about). The signals coming from the environment enable us to perceive what is there. — Andrew M
I can assure you that I don’t. I just don’t think Hacker and Bennett can explain away the issues of the neural binding problem with a brief bit of philosophical jargon. — Wayfarer
I mentioned Andrew Brook above, a scholar who says that Kant is ‘the godfather of cognitive science’. I wonder what H&B would make of that? — Wayfarer
//ps// Is Bennett a neuroscientist or a cognitive scientist? — Wayfarer
They wrote the influential book "Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience" so they've given these issues serious consideration — Andrew M
One cannot combine colour, form and dimensions into perceptions, just as one cannot put events into holes (sic) - this form of words makes no sense. — History of Cognitive Neuroscience, pp37-38,55 - Bennett, M. R., Hacker, P. M. S.
They don't mention Kant in PFN. — Andrew M
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.