From: Patrick van den Berg (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Nov 17 2002 - 11:39:20 GMT
--- Scott R <email@example.com> wrote:
> Do you know of any experiment that distinguishes between a TV model of
> brain (that is, that the brain organizes awareness) over a computer
> (that the brain originates awareness)?
Hey! never heard of the 'tv model' but it sounds interesting! Was it you
by the way who eleborated quite a bit on a metaphor with camera's,
screens and all, some months back?
> - Scott
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Maher" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: <email@example.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2002 5:00 PM
> Subject: RE: MD Individuality
> > Hi Patrick,
> > YOU WROTE:
> > > With all due respect, aren't the neural events we
> > > can 'see' in the
> > > laboratory totally different things than our
> > > cognitions? To me they are
> > > as irreduciable to each other as wood is to marmer.
> > > They're simply two
> > > different things. They have no obvious relationship
> > > as between 'sound
> > > and grooves'. If you think there is, show me!
> > With equal respect, they are not totally different
> > things and they do have an obvious relationship.
> > Indeed if one maintains otherwise then one is simply
> > being blind to cognitive neuroscience:
> > ". . . in 1880 only the rudiments of neural
> > functioning were understood, and a reasonable person
> > could have doubted that all experience arises from
> > quivering nerve tails. But no longer. . . . The
> > evidence is overwhelming that every aspect of our
> > mental lives depends entirely on physiological events
> > in the tissues of the brain."
> > (Stephen Pinker - The Blank Slate - 2002 - BCA - pg
> > 41)
> > "Every emotion and thought gives off physical signals
> > and the new technologies for detecting them are so
> > accurate that they can literally read a persons mind
> > and tell a neuroscientist whether the person is
> > imagining a place or a face."
> > (Ibid pg42)
> > This is not a matter of faith, it is scientific fact
> > reproduced in experiment after experiment and attested
> > to in peer reviewed journals.
> > Most neuroscientists I have looked at would not agree
> > with your description of their findings. Worse, your
> > out of hand dismissal of monist understandings (simply
> > calling them 'word games' is not an argument BTW)
> > makes it almost pointless to give you contemporary
> > non-Cartesian philosophers (of which there are
> > dozens)simply because you have already decided that
> > they are closet dualists. But, being one who prefers
> > science to philosophy I would suggest Pinker as a
> > start.
> > John
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> > from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> > http://uk.my.yahoo.com
> > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> > Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> > MD Queries - firstname.lastname@example.org
> > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - email@example.com
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Nov 17 2002 - 11:39:46 GMT