[MD] The Edge 2006 Annual Question

[ian glendinning]

Scott,

As I said before ... so you have something unexplained, even if you
invent the category of things that don't need explanation. I'm sure
the physicalists would not be alone in crying - Foul !

We know where we stand.

Ian

On 1/12/06, Scott Roberts <jse885 at localnet.com> wrote:
> Ian,
>
> Ian said:
> Scott I agree with your points.
> Something I said earlier in another conversation with you was that
> this ineffable gap may be a common theme in any metaphysics, but the
> size and complexity of the gap in terms of the explanation missing
> does of course vary. This is the point I have against people like
> yourself, who (seem to) claim that the gap is bootstrapped by
> pre-existing "sophisticated" consciousness.
>
> Scott:
> I'm not sure I understand the last sentence. But in any case,  I don't see
> consciousness (or DQ) as being a gap in "things that are explained (or
> explainable)" -- that's only a problem for a physicalist. Rather, I see
> consciousness as not belonging to the category of things explained,
> unexplained, explainable, or unexplainable.
>
> - Scott
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>