The "knowing brain" does not know anything, it's a fiction. Reality per se does not need or use a map or mapping code, though we do in 3rd person mode. Reality exists before man and after man, as nicely themed by Stapledon. Consciousness, soul, sentience or whatever the blah word chosen is the bottom line. Chop that out and there is no knowing. And, yes 'know' is one of the less felicitous words around. Castaneda uses tonal and nagual, which is a traditional dualism when respective to real and illusion there is no dualism possible.
adrian Georges Metanomski wrote: > > > > --- On Tue, 10/21/08, Joseph Polanik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> What Does the Knowing Brain Know? > ============== > Apparently nothing much. > Georges. > ============== >> Michael Eldred wrote: >> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb Wed, 15 Oct 2008 18:14:12 >> EDT: >> >> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> >> >>>Hi Jud,Previously you said: *.... what cannot >> be known is that >> >>>which does not exist to be known.* Standing >> alone, this statement >> >>>infers that *known* is understood. But in your >> comments above you >> >>>indicate that *knowledge* is really >> undefinable. This means that the >> >>>quote I cite must be relativistically >> understood, in other words not >> >>>understood in any absolute way. Could you make >> the same point without >> >>>using *known?* >> >> >>Hi Richard:What I meant by that is that >> *knowledge* (like *ideas* >> >>or *memes*) does not exist - it is a reification >> of the existential >> >>modes of a knowing brain >> >> >ME: "knowing brain" That's a good one. >> The eliminative materialist has >> >eliminated the/his mind, only to invoke the voodoo >> notion of a "knowing >> >brain". >> >> also eliminated is any awareness of the difference between >> truth and >> error or between knowledge and opinion. >> >> examining the brain state of someone during the middle ages >> who thought >> that the sun revolved around the earth would reveal a brain >> in the >> existential modality of 'knowing' something that is >> false. >> >> Joe >> >> >> -- >> Philosophy is, after all, done ultimately in the first >> person for the >> first person. --- H-N Castaneda >> >> @[EMAIL PROTECTED]@^@ >> http://what-am-i.net >> @[EMAIL PROTECTED]@^@ >> >> > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
