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
>> mind.

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 everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to