On Oct 17, 7:02 am, Stathis Papaioannou <stath...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Suppose I decide to arrange three stones in a triangle. Do the stones
> "create" the triangle (upward causation), or does the triangle
> "constrain" the stones (downward causation)?

The triangle does not exist. If anything, it 'insists'. The stones are
mere placeholders to satisfy our subjective motive of expressing our
intangible abstraction externally. A cat sees no triangle there. The
stones aren't causing anything, they are just sitting exactly where we
put them. It is our decision, and our projection of that decision
through the spinal cord, efferent nerves, arms, and fingertips that
has caused their placement to our cognitive-representational

What you aren't seeing is that the triangle does not objectively exist
at all. By setting 'the triangle' as the a priori true fact to be
explained, misdirects our attention from the concrete reality of the
situation to an imaginary world where sensorimotive perception has
concrete existence (which ironically actually would be magic). Like
Brent, your view takes pattern recognition for granted. You are
'eating the menu', so to speak - conflating symbolic interpretation
(map) with physical existence (territory). The only upward causation
is sensory feedback bouncing off of the stones which the eyes can read
visually and the hands can read as a tactile text. The stones are
otherwise completely passive.


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