[MD] Reductionism

[gav]

hello,

> 
> [gav]
> this statement presupposes SOM.
> (subjective) experience begins (occurs after) the
> transduction of energy
> into neural impulses (object).
> 
> it reduces experience to a physiological (materialistic)
> base. 
> 
> [Krimel]
> Regardless of the alleged advantages of radical empiricism,
> it builds on
> sensory empiricism. We can not experience relations between
> our sense
> impressions if we have no sense impressions.

gav: how can radical empiricism be built upon sensory empiricism? radical empiricism is *radical*: it presupposes nothing. sensory empiricism, as you would define it, presumes the subject and object and a mechanism by which one knows the other. one view is more empirical than the other and is therefore more basic. by def this is radical empiricism.
> 
> [gav]
> i am not trying to be smart when i say that the logic of
> this seems simple
> and clear. what part of my efforts at explanation do you
> have issue with?
> 
> experience is happening simultaneously with the
> transduction of energy into
> neural impulses; neurophysiological activity is a
> relatively prosaic
> analogue of experience.
> 
> [Krimel]
> The idea of disembodied "experience" happening in the
> absence of neural
> impulses is a heavily fanciful analogue that might appeal
> to the children of
> especially uneducated adults if it was explained in a
> soothing tone of
> voice.

gav: i didn't say anything about experience happening in the absence of neural impulses, though for trees and organisms without neurons it obviously does. the neural impulses don't cause the experience in humans - that is what i have been saying in plain language for a while now - they are concurrent; the neurochemistry is an analogue. for pete's sake read what i write man! slowly. the rest of your offering here is puerile.

> 
> As for your underlying assumption that it is just
> correlation I have been
> waiting for you the explain the correlation between Phineas
> Gage's change in
> personality and the spike through his forehead. Or on a
> more personal note,
> if you don't think the neural chemistry causes changes in
> brain states why
> would you engage in fungal sacraments' in a Liverpool
> bath?

gav: the mushrooms caused my experience to alter from the norm - more vivid, funnier, profound, connected; i am sure my brain chemistry was altered too. neural chemistry and brain states are synonyms so your question, as is often the case, doesn't make sense.

> 
> 
> 
> 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/
> 


      Access Yahoo!7 Mail on your mobile. Anytime. Anywhere.
Show me how: http://au.mobile.yahoo.com/mail