On 8/16/2011 12:37 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 16, 1:44 pm, meekerdb<meeke...@verizon.net>  wrote:
On 8/16/2011 10:16 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:

It's not only possible, it absolutely is otherwise. I move my arm. I
determine the biochemical reactions that move it. Me. For my personal
reasons which are knowable to me in my own natural language and are
utterly unknowable by biochemical analysis. It's hard for me to accept
that you cannot see the flaw in this reasoning.
It's not a flaw in his reasoning, it's description at a different
level.  While it is no doubt true that you, the whole you, determine to
move your arm; it seems not to be the case that the *conscious* you does
so.  Various experiments starting with Libet show that the biochemical
reactions that move it occur before you are conscious of the decision to
move it.
You make the decision before the reporting part of you can report it
is all. It's still you that is consciously making the decision. It's
just because we are applying naive realism to how the self works and
assuming that the narrative voice which accompanies consciousness and
can answer questions or push buttons is the extent of consciousness.

Now you're changing the definitions of words again. What does "conscious" mean, if not "the part of your thinking that you can report on." I would never claim that you didn't make the decision - it's just that "you" is a lot bigger than your consciousness.

If moving my arm is like reading a book, I can't tell you what the
book is about until I actually have read it, but I still am initiating
the reading of the book, and not the book forcing me to read it.

Another non-analogy.  Is this sentence making you think of a dragon?



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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to