a question I want to pose to the community as well as Bruno is:
Bruno, have you ever seriously studied Nietzsche... he is probably the
single most persuasive critic of Platonism that has ever existed.
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 2:08 PM, B Soroud <bsor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> it just seems to me that mentality might be a better term to use then
> this is a notoriously difficult problem....
> On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Stephen Paul King
>> Hi B,
>> Speaking only for myself, I do believe that consciousness is causally
>> effective, in the sense that if it did not exist then certain other features
>> of the world would not exist and that my belief that I (an indicator for
>> inner subjective experience of “being in the world”) is not just an
>> Is this belief justified? Hard to say, but so far I have not found
>> that the materialist, physicalist, etc. have successfully given me
>> unassailable reasons to believe that by experience of “being in the
>> world” is just some kind of nonsense that we lie to ourselves about., pace
>> Dennett, Churchland, etc.
>> I supposed that I might be considered a dualist, but unlike Descartes,
>> I argue against the notion of substance as an ontological primitive; instead
>> it is proposed that all properties emerge from process ala Bergson and
>> Heraclitus. I see mind and body as a specific instantiations of the Stone
>> duality and the relation between them is an isomorphism. There is no “causal
>> link” between the two, in the Humean sense, needed. For an elaboration of
>> this view see: http://boole.stanford.edu/pub/ratmech.pdf
>> AFAIK, Bruno adheres to an Idealist version of Platonism. We welcome
>> your thoughts and comments.
>> *From:* B Soroud <bsor...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Saturday, July 02, 2011 3:25 PM
>> *To:* email@example.com
>> *Subject:* Re: consciousness
>> furthermore you seem to conceive of a consciousness apart from its
>> properties... you are making the erroneous distinction of attribute and
>> essence.... you sound much like Descartes.
>> On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 12:24 PM, B Soroud <bsor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> "A property of consciousness is"
>>> it sounds like you are reifying "consciousness"... consciousness is not a
>>> thing in itself, consciousness does not exist in and of itself... it can
>>> only be understood within the interdependent and complex framework of
>>> sensation, bodies, space.... consciousness of something, in and through
>>> something.... inseparable from the system of space, energy, matter and
>>> motion... and essential equal to it.... not something seperate and distinct
>>> from it that can exist independently of it....
>>> consciousness is not something that exists in itself.... consciousness is
>>> always embodied consciousness of life.... in and through life and the
>>> complex instrument of form and the mystery of sensation and generation.
>>> Consciousness is a phenomena of the "body" and its natural system... and is
>>> equal to that "body" and "body system".
>>> it sounds like you guys are reifing consciousness....
>>> On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Pzomby <htra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jul 1, 4:23 am, selva kumar <selvakr1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > Is consciousness causally effective ?
>>>> In my opinion, yes, if in simple terms, it is logically correct to
>>>> state: A property of consciousness is….the capacity and ability of
>>>> individual human consciousness to create intentionally desired
>>>> physical and mental effects.
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> For more options, visit this group at
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
For more options, visit this group at