David Nyman wrote: > 2009/9/23 Flammarion <peterdjo...@yahoo.com>: > >>>>> Some people can argue that MGA is not needed. They believe that it is >>>>> obvious that consciousness is not something material at all, and that >>>>> it is a waste of time of both trying to attach consciousness to >>>>> matter, or to argue with those who believes that is possible (with or >>>>> without comp). >>>> But I'll bet they still try to avoid being struck in the head. >>> Good point. However, Donald Hoffman makes a highly relevant >>> distinction between taking one's experiences literally, and taking >>> them seriously. I would recommend the following piece, particularly >>> the section on the MUI (Multimodal User Interface): >>> >>> http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/ConsciousRealism2.pdf >> That is just rehashed idealism with all the standard problems. > > The point is that Brent's comment - like Johnson's 'refutation' of > Berkeley - is ineffectual as a dismissal of Bruno's theoretical > position. Hoffman gives a neat account of how this might go. As to > the problems, you pays your money...... > > David
Of course Johnson's refutation didn't change any idealist minds, but he pointed to the use of operational definitions as the basis of science which ultimately had a lot more influence than Berkeley. Brent --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
