In a message dated 8/26/2004 4:07:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gene space arguments are fine if you're discussing creatures with no clear 
>sense of self-awareness or consequences for actions, such as bacteria or 
>tobacco company attorneys. Once you install a sense of "I", things change.

Keep in mind, that a sense of "I" is limited entirely to the "I".
Why do you think that? If we behave in the same way as an animal that lacks 
our intelligence and consciousness (it has a more limited sense or absent sense 
of "I") then maybe our consciousness really isn't the thing that is 
controlling our behavior. One way to think of consciousness is an biographer who looks 
at the actions of the subject and then makes up a story to explain why the 
subject did such and so. Many "split brain experiments" have documented that the 
conscious self will make up reasons for actions that aren't so. Split brain 
person is someone who has had the left and right hemispheres disconnected to 
treat seizure disorders or psychosis. Experiment. Cover the right eye (so that 
the left hemisphere can't see what is going on. Show a card that says "pick up 
that chair to the person".. Now ask the person why he/she picked it up. The 
person will make up a story (because I like that chair more than the one I am 
sitting in).  
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to