>>
>> "If the mind is what the brain does, then what exactly is a coffee cup
>> doing?"
>
> It's not mind-ing.
>
>> For that question is just as valid and has just as complex an
>> answer...
>
> Of course not.
>
>> .yet we do not ask it. Every object in the universe is like this.
>> This is the mother of all anthropomorphisms.
>>
>> There is a view of the universe from the perspective of being a coffee
>> cup
>
> No there isn't. It has no internal representation of anything else.
>
> This isn't a "mysterious qualia" issue. Things like digital cameras
> and tape recorders demonstrably contain representations.Things like
> coffee cups don't.
>
>> and it is being equivalently created by whatever is
>> the difference between it and a brain. And you are
>> not entitled to say 'Nothing', all you can say
>> is that there's no brain material, so it isn't
>> like a brain. You can make no assertion as to the
>> actual experience because describing a brain does
>> NOT explain the causality of it....Hot cup? Cold
>> cup? Full? Empty? All the same? Not the same? None
>> of these questions are helped by the "what the
>> brain does" bandaid excuse for proper science.
>> Glaring missing physics.
>>
What you need to do is deliver a law of nature that says representation
makes qualia. Some physical law. I have at least found candidate real
physices to hypothesise and it indicates that representation is NOT causal
of anything other than representation.
metaphorically:
You have no paint on your paint brush. You are telling me you don't need
any. You assume the act of painting art, and ONLY the act of painting art
makes paint. Randomly spraying paint everywhere is "painting", just not
necessarily art. That act is still using paint and visible.
A brain has a story to tell that is more like art.
A coffee cup has a story to tell that definitely isn't art. But it's not
necessarily nothing.
Your assumptions in respect of representation are far far more
unjustified, magical, mystical and baseless than any of my propositions in
respect of physics. I have a hypothesis for a physical process for 'paint'
that exists in brain material. The suggested physics involved means I
could make a statement 'it's not like anything' to be a coffee cup because
that physics is not present in the necessary form. That explanation has
NOTHING to do with representation.
You have nothing but assumptions that paint is magic.
....All your comments are addressed in the last paragraph of my original
(above), negating all your claims...which you then didn't respond or
acknowledge. You have obviously responded without reading everything
first. Would you please stop wasting my time like this. Endless gainsay is
not an argument.... now say... "yes it is!".
Colin Hales
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Mon Nov 27 2006 - 14:40:17 PST