On Monday, February 10, 2014 3:51:59 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote: > > On 10 February 2014 00:32, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]<javascript:>> > wrote: > > >> Strictly speaking everything is tentative and subject to revision in > the > >> light of new evidence, but some things in science as well as in > everyday > >> life you have to simply assume are true. For example, there is the > >> assumption that the ground will not disappear from under my feet when I > >> walk. > > > > > > I don't think that requires an assumption of truth, it is just an > > expectation of continuity. > > Continuity and the idea that physical laws will be consistent in > different times and places are definitely assumptions. They could turn > out to be false tomorrow. >
The possibility of continuity seems like it is implicit in almost every kind of experience. A mouse has an expectation of continuity. The idea of physical laws though is a much more sophisticated intellectual construct. > > > That the difference in what language we speak > > could be 'due to brain difference" I would not say follows as a > condition > > which is plainly evident. > > I would say it's plainly evident. The alternative is that we think > with something other than our brain. > Another alternative is that the brain is itself is only a brain-shaped experience which arises from a consensus of many nested ongoing experiences. It's a lot easier to explain why a storytelling cosmos evolves a brain than why a mechanical universe evolves a brain that thinks it is a person. > > To the contrary, computational models of > > consciousness would be hard pressed to explain so many differences in > > language. Why should we all be able to communicate with each other > > genetically irrespective of geography and culture, but did not begin > from a > > similarly unified linguistic genome? The fact that human languages, even > > ones which are tightly related etymologically are incomprehensible to > > non-speakers suggests that in fact, the characteristics of language are > very > > different from biological systems. If language was closely associated > with > > brain differences, then we might expect certain drugs to work only if > you > > spoke a particular language, or that there could be particular foods or > > drugs which would aid understanding particular languages. If you want to > > understand Russian better, you might drink a lot of vodka to condition > your > > brain into a more conducive brain difference. > > None of this reasoning is plausible. > Why not? Craig > > -- > Stathis Papaioannou > -- 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.
