Hi tintner michael and Albert Cororna, I am accused of wasting peoples' time by constantly posting here and elsewhere on the subject of Leibniz.
I do that because people are already wasting their time by posting totally impossible views on what mind is or what consciousness is, supposedly the chief topics on these sites. Why ? The current model of the mind or brain has no subject, only a description of a subject such as "subject". which is not subjective but objective because it can be located in spacetime and described in words. You need a living, nonphysical, subjective subject. In fact life also needs a living subject. The same as is reading this paragraph. Why ? Consciousness is bipolar, consisting of a nonphysical-subject/physical-object pair, a true living subject looking at a spactime physical object. Only Kant and Leibniz take this criticism seriously, and of them, only Leibniz does it specifically. Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] See my Leibniz site at http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: tintner michael Receiver: MindBrain Time: 2013-08-02, 07:17:50 Subject: [Mind and Brain] Re: Why life is impossible to understand in thematerialistic model of e >I suspect this is a matter of perspective. > >You're assuming that the current materialistic model is the only possible >such model, rather than merely an "early evolution" model of materialism. > >Science is still looking at the world as materialistic pieces/parts. It >does not yet have a true holistic, integrated materialistic model of the >world, which understands how the parts fit together to form wholes. It >doesn't understand "self" - how the living machine that is a human being >can continuously configure and reconfigure its body as very >different wholes - how a Peter Sellers can assume a myriad >roles/personalities/bodies. It doesn't understand the mechanics of >evolution - how bodies can be "reconfigured"/transformed into radically >different forms other bodies. > >This is not surprising. So far we have only created machines that are >"production lines" of parts - basically Rube Goldberg lines of parts moving >each other like lines of dominoes. We haven't created - have barely >conceived of - machines that are truly integrated wholes like living >creatures. > >When we start acquiring holistic materialistic models, I suspect your >problems/objections will disappear. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
