Le 20-mars-06, à 17:31, Georges Quénot wrotet :
>> I think that modern physics and the synthetic
>> theory of evolution provide a resonable (though partial)
>> account for the "technical" capabilities of the human
I want add something. Evolution provides an explanation of the
technical ability of the human mind. But those technical ability are
generally limited to third person describable phenomena. It does not
explain the first person feature (including consciousness). The UDA at
least shows that evolution, if you base it on physics, will lose the
first person feature. That is why so much physicalists are tempted to
just "eliminate consciousness", either literally or under the label
"epiphenomena", or just "uninteresting"!.
But I believe more in consciousness than in anything else, and any one
understanding the sentence "headache are annoying" do, so elimination
of consciousness is really like omitting data.
But then, unless the UDA reasoning is wrong, eventually the
comp-or-weaker hypothesis leads to an elimination of stuffy or primary
matter. It is easier, after all to explain the dreamy *appearance* of
matter from a consciousness theory, than to explain the disappearance
of the lived consciousness from a theory of matter!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at