On 9/8/2012 3:50 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 07.09.2012 22:22 Stephen P. King said the following:
...
Hi Evgenii,
Consider the mental image that a person suffering from anorexia has
of themselves. It is distorted and false. How does this happen?
Consider the Placebo effect and its complement, the Nocebo effect.
Are they not examples of mental states acting on physical states? How
does this happen if the mental states are just illusions (ala
materialism) or the physical states are just illusions (ala
Immaterialism)? Somehow they must be correlated with each other in
some way and which ever way that is it is one that is not always a
one to one and onto map.
Hi Stephen,
I am taking place right now in a discussion in a Russian forum on
philosophy. There was a good point there that when we say that
Descartes was a dualist (res cogitans and res extensa), it is actually
wrong. By Descartes there was also God and as a result everything was
quite consistent by him. Problems start when we consider res cogitans
and res extensa without God. Just FYI, I personally have enjoyed such
a comment.
I have to read Pratt yet, sorry. Just a small note now. I do not see
how res cogitans and res extensa allow us to explain a
three-dimensional world that I observe. When we say ideas, then it
could work but it is unclear to me what to do with a visual world.
Say I see my image behind the mirror (I have written behind instead of
in the mirror just to better describe my experience). How could you
describe this phenomenon by means of res cogitans and res extensa?
Evgenii
--
http://blog.rudnyi.ru/2012/05/brain-and-world.html
Hi Evgenii,
I would not, and neither Pratt, use the notion of substance as did
Descartes. Pratt explains himself well:
http://boole.stanford.edu/pub/ratmech.pdf
From the abstract:
"This paper addresses the chief stumbling block for Descartes’ 17thcentury
philosophy of mind-body dualism, how can the fundamentally
dissimilar mental and physical planes causally interact with each other?
We apply Cartesian logic to reject not only divine intervention,
preordained
synchronization, and the eventual mass retreat to monism, but also
an assumption Descartes himself somehow neglected to reject, that causal
interaction within these planes is an easier problem than between. We use
Chu spaces and residuation to derive all causal interaction, both between
and within the two planes, from a uniform and algebraically rich theory of
between-plane interaction alone. Lifting the two-valued Boolean logic of
binary relations to the complex-valued fuzzy logic of quantum mechanics
transforms residuation into a natural generalization of the inner product
operation of a Hilbert space and demonstrates that this account of causal
interaction is of essentially the same form as the Heisenberg-Schr¨odinger
quantum-mechanical solution to analogous problems of causal interaction
in physics."
The duality between mind in body is defined in terms of the relation
that is known in mathematics to exist between Boolean algebras and
certain topological spaces. Pratt presents a step-wise variational
calculus to model both body -body and mind-mind interactions.
--
Onward!
Stephen
http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html
--
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.
