Perhaps It Was Just His Neurons...

By -
that made him think this made any sense:

"And he offered what I thought was one of the wisest responses to the debate over the existence of evil (and thus free will):

"What he suggested is that we ought to act as if we had free will to choose good or evil."

So, this "wise response" suggests that we should choose to act as if we are able to make choices. Which, of course, we could only do if we were really able to make choices.

Comments

  1. Ryan1:38 AM

    I thought dualism was just passe for most theologians at this point?

    ReplyDelete
  2. gcallah2:35 AM

    Yes, dualism is surely nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  3. PH5:41 AM

    Are you referring to mind-matter dualism or moral dualism?

    ReplyDelete
  4. gcallah7:29 AM

    Me, I was referring to mind-matter.

    ReplyDelete
  5. PH7:34 AM

    What makes you think mind-matter dualism is "surely nonsense"?

    ReplyDelete
  6. gcallah8:25 AM

    Because once you posit two separate realms like this that are inherently unconnected, there is no way to get them back together!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Bob Murphy8:57 AM

    Well don't be too harsh Gene. I can remember years ago when I was telling you consciousness was an evolved "user illusion," and you said, "What user is it fooling?" I thought that was a flippant objection, but of course now I see it's the whole point.

    ReplyDelete
  8. gcallah8:58 AM

    Harshness is my middle name!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Jim9:37 AM

    This was making me think about how deucedly difficult it is to solve the "homonculus problem" and then I see you already got to that.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more