On 24 Sep, 06:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sep 23, 10:39 pm, Youness Ayaita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > There have always been two ways to interpret the interrelationship
> > between the physical world and our minds.
>
> There's a lot more than two ways.
>
> >The first one is to consider
> > the physical world to be fundamental; from this perspective, the
> > appearance of the mind is to be understood with the help of some
> > neurological theory that maps physical states of the brain to states
> > of the mind or observer moments.
>
> Not neccesserily.  There are several possible variations on taking the
> physical world to be fundamental.  Strong materialism does not map
> physical states to observer moments - strong materialism - or
> 'eliminativism' - says that observer moments are merely a human
> construct we use to describe what are really physical processs.
> According to this doctrine, you can't rightly talk about observer
> moments at all.  What you have described above is weak materialism -
> weak materialism - or property dualism - would agree that the physical
> world is fundamental, but allow that observer moments are still real
> 'ontological primatives' which attach to (map to) the physical.  See
> my next paragraph below.

There is another option which you have not considered.
Most materialists would say that OMs are identical to  some physical
state.



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" 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/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to