> > [Krimel] > > experience BEGINS with transduction of energy into > > neural impulses.
> Craig > I think what Krimel means is that the experience of EACH > INDIVIDUAL > " BEGINS with transduction of energy into neural > impulses". > 'transduction of energy into neural impulses' is a concept > derived from > experience, but the concept was around before most of us > began experiencing. [gav] this statement presupposes SOM. (subjective) experience begins (occurs after) the transduction of energy into neural impulses (object). it reduces experience to a physiological (materialistic) base. [Krimel] Regardless of the alleged advantages of radical empiricism, it builds on sensory empiricism. We can not experience relations between our sense impressions if we have no sense impressions. [gav] i am not trying to be smart when i say that the logic of this seems simple and clear. what part of my efforts at explanation do you have issue with? experience is happening simultaneously with the transduction of energy into neural impulses; neurophysiological activity is a relatively prosaic analogue of experience. [Krimel] The idea of disembodied "experience" happening in the absence of neural impulses is a heavily fanciful analogue that might appeal to the children of especially uneducated adults if it was explained in a soothing tone of voice. As for your underlying assumption that it is just correlation I have been waiting for you the explain the correlation between Phineas Gage's change in personality and the spike through his forehead. Or on a more personal note, if you don't think the neural chemistry causes changes in brain states why would you engage in fungal sacraments' in a Liverpool bath? Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
