Philosophy Now Forum

That is correct. They are missing mind. Why? Because of coherence in motion . As I mentioned there is nothing between X and Y and nothing cannot possibly coherently cause Y considering the fact that X is gone and no information about X could possibly exist in nothing. Please explain what exactly yo...

I still don’t understand the X to Y argument for mind. Bahman, could you please explain the argument in less abstract terms more psychologically and neurobiologically? For starters, what are these 2 “states of affairs” in terms of a brain, or one’s psychology? Why must these 2 states of affairs cha...

I still don’t understand the X to Y argument for mind. Bahman, could you please explain the argument in less abstract terms more psychologically and neurobiologically? For starters, what are these 2 “states of affairs” in terms of a brain, or one’s psychology? Why must these 2 states of affairs chan...

The duty of the brain is to provide inputs to the mind. We experience everything. Experience, however, is codded differently for each mind. Hopeless dualism. Naive teleology. PS I prefer Haddock to Cod. So don't have mind and body? Mind is brain function, brain is part of the body. You break them u...

The duty of the brain is to provide sensory inputs to the mind. We experience everything. Experience, however, is codded differently for each mind. The above point is too loose. It is the sensory circuits in the brain that collect sensory inputs to perform whatever is necessary for the brain to fun...

That is not the case when you cause and decide a motivation at once (the second scenario). That is true since your decision always coincides with motivation. So by “you cause” you mean the mind causes and decides on a motivation. My question remains, how does the mind do this with no prior causes? ...

You need motivation for doing things including decision. You, however, can create motivation and follow it whicih means that you can initiate a chain of causality . You follow a chain of causality when one motivation is available at any point. I’m not so sure of this part, though I will allow you t...

Think of the case that the free-agent is made of two parts, X and Y are the parts. Suppose that free-agent arrives at a situation that requires a decision. X says to go this way and Y says to go that way. No decision could be made. Okay I think I see what you are getting at. First, you are assuming...

Knowledge is about how concepts are related. Okay, that’s fair enough, I’ll run with that. Something which is structured has parts. Parts are either make decision or not. In the first case, parts could make different decisions in a situation. Therefore, there is a conflict of interest. I don’t quit...

Knowledge is about how concepts are related. Okay, that’s fair enough, I’ll run with that. Something which is structured has parts. Parts are either make decision or not. In the first case, parts could make different decisions in a situation. Therefore, there is a conflict of interest. I don’t quit...

Our brains actually have a built in module for determining if someone or something APPEARS to have a mind. From an early age, young children develop an ability called “theory of mind”, that is, the ability to determine what another mind is thinking. Another description might be, the ability to take ...

edit: sorry misposted while composing

Here is the argument: 1) Knowledge is structured 2) Creation requires knowledge 3) Therefore, any created thing is structured 4) Free-agent is not structured (because otherwise there would be tension in decision) 5) Therefore, free-agent cannot be created 1) Pretty vague. What is the structure of k...

Our lives are grounded in the assumption of patterns that we integrate into a new identity through reciprocality. It is this cycle of patterns, evidenced both by nature and consciousness, that necessitates from argument of symmetry alone, that an after life must exist. Let me see if I can decode th...

Yes I try to give some reference point to argue from. But you are then missing the point of the rest of the post if that is all you can take from it. Well, I think you are arguing that we all have our own private perceptions, from which we construct our individual world models to which we respond i...