Le 24-déc.-06, à 11:49, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit :
> I'm not sure that this is what you meant, but there is in a sense an
> objective basis to the personal or subjective, which is simply that
> when I say I feel or desire something, this is an empirical statement:
> either I do feel it or I am lying. Also, there is an objective
> explanation for why I have the feeling in terms of neurophysiology,
> evolution and so on. But this is not enough for some people and they
> think, for example, that there must be more to "love" than just
> particular feelings and the scientific basis for these feelings. But
> this mysterious love-substance would appear to make no difference
> whatsoever. The evidence is that if certain chemical reactions occur,
> the love feeling also occurs, and these chemical reactions occur
> because they have evolved that way to assist bonding with family,
> community and so on. That explanation covers everything, and the
> love-substance remains superfluous and undetectable, inviting Occam's
> Razor to cut it down.
I can agree completely but as you expect I will ask you to cut *any*
substance once you bet on comp. Not just love-substance, but
neuron-substance as well.
(Or explain me at which step of the UDA reasoning you feel unconvinced,
thanks ;-)
... of course we can believe in neurons and ... love. No need of any
substances ... (more exactly, with comp, substances can't help).
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 Sun Dec 24 2006 - 11:02:12 PST