I wrote: > The one line from his "Prelude" I hope you will remember as you read on in > his book is: > > > >"Our science is incomplete, no map of matter will ever explain the > >IMMATERIALITY of our consciousness." > Geoff responded:
> Do you mean to deny the 'immateriality" of consciousness? > Geoff C > No, Geoff, just the opposite. Recall I also said: "I have never enjoyed people who revel in their inconsistency -- as Whitman did. Lehrer differs from Whitman: Lehrer does not realize he is inconsistent." What I hope is that listers will attend to Lehrer's uses of 'brain', 'mind', body, 'soul', 'unity', 'irreducible whole', 'came from', 'depended upon', 'art', and other terms; notice the lack of descriptions of what he has in mind with each term; notice the the blurry inconsistencies in his evident thinking. (E.g. you have suspect anyone who talks of a 'human being' as an irreducible whole and yet goes on to distinguish body, consciousness, soul, immaterial mind etc.) Principally, perhaps, evaluate his efforts to reconcile Damasio's physicalist views with his, Lehrer's, insistence on the immateriality of mind. And so forth. ************** Life should be easier. So should your homepage. Try the NEW AOL.com. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity& ncid=emlcntaolcom00000002)
