Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Mind and Brain] Re: Ruminations

Expand Messages
  • Dr. Angell O. de la Sierra, Esq.
    Alex: Perhaps you are assuming that observation is always possible and so do not have a reference point of an absolutely unobserved and unobservable entity to
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 28, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Alex: "Perhaps you are assuming that observation is always possible and so do not have a reference point of an absolutely unobserved and unobservable entity to discover what observation actually does."
      First, thanks for taking the time to read my brainstorm. :-) I was busy and couldn't answer you earlier. Your comment reflects yet another aspect of the objection to consciousness (or existence) being considered a real property which, if it is, then it should add something to the recipient (as all real property does). The other objection, which I did not discuss, is the one you bring now. In this brief space I can only say that it would be an absurd to conclude that other humans come into existence (or consciousness) only when observed and only for the observer. It is easier to think the predicates were always present, independent of any observation. As to adding 'tropes' like existence or consciousness to an observed human, you may remember how I escaped that trap by arguing the fact of their third person empirical verification and saying:
      "Since either one obviously can not be the recipient of their own existence, somehow they managed to individuate it. We can argue the same way for his consciousness! Socrates cleverly avoided the objection that existence could not be a real property because it added nothing to his recipient by coining the term 'bound existence' which carried in addition to a spatial connotation, other predicates such as bounds of desire, thought, etc. which clearly is compatible with their individuation among the members of the set. Thus consciousness may not verifiably add anything to an observed human being because it is just 'bounded' as a real and not invariant property like his existence."
      BTW, if you interest your comments to be published along with the paper, let me know. Your previous critique was published. Dr.d'
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: dralexgreen <dralexgreen@...>
      To: MindBrain@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 8:56 AM
      Subject: [Mind and Brain] Re: Ruminations


      [Dr.d]
      >
      > http://ydelasie.0catch.com/New%20SelfConsciousness.index.htm
      > "Ruminations......."
      "Consequently when I watch YOU trying to make sense of this paragraph
      is not a Cambridge property, your existence and consciousness are
      genuine and real to me! But, does that add anything to you?, all real
      properties do! The conclusion is clear to us, consciousness, by
      scientific methodology accounts may not be verifiably real, but, does
      any one deny it? "

      [Alex]
      Does observation add anything to the observed entity? If observation
      were absolutely impossible what would be the state of the entity?

      Perhaps you are assuming that observation is always possible and so
      do not have a reference point of an absolutely unobserved and
      unobservable entity to discover what observation actually does.

      Best Wishes

      Alex Green





      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      ADVERTISEMENT




      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      MindBrain-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.