Monday, April 14, 2008

Peter Watts on why what we dotingly refer to as self-awareness is a neurological con.

By the way, I did promise to go away for a while. But this is important.


Anonymous said...

More mind-brain misidentification fallacy. The simple (and in many ways misleading) software-hardware analogy ought to be convincing enough. Granted, even software is not self-aware, but the hardware sure as hell ain't the program. It only RUNS the program as, in a crude sense, the brain "runs" the mind. But the mind does the actual thinking, feeling, willing, believing, judging, etc., not the brain.

I have no problem with "unconscious mentation" but it is still the mind and NOT the brain that is performing this unconscious mentation. The mind-brain misidentification fallacy (essentially, that the brain not the mind somehow "thinks") seems to me so blatantly and obviously wrongheaded, I find it hard to believe how many otherwise intelligent people seem to subscribe to it. It's our materialistic age and culture, I suppose. (Sigh.)

Anonymous said...

But, WMB, isn't the brain the underlying foundation of what the mind is? In other words, isn't the physical nature of the brain required for mind to exist?

If not, in your interpretation, please explain. Do you think mind can exist without the brain? I'm really quite curious as to what you think mind is--can you give us some pointers to online data about what you perceive it to be? Seriously.