Driving the Ghost from the Machine

Discussion of articles that appear in the magazine.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Philosophy Now
Posts: 1205
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:49 am

Driving the Ghost from the Machine

Post by Philosophy Now »

Alan Brody reviews The Metaphysics of Mind by Anthony Kenny.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/13/Driving_the_Ghost_from_the_Machine
owl of Minerva
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:16 pm

Re: Driving the Ghost from the Machine

Post by owl of Minerva »

It is likely that Descartes was right in seeing the body and mind as too separate elements or substances. It is also likely that he was wrong in seeing the mind as non elemental, comparing it to the soul. The material or physical consists of gross elemental matter and fine elemental forces, also material. The mind could be conceived as a force, elemental and physical, the subtlest of the forces. The soul as limited when it identifies, through ego consciousness, with a body. Hence, body; gross elements, mind subtlest of the fine elemental forces, soul free except when through identification with an ego it identifies with a particular body.
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Driving the Ghost from the Machine

Post by Belinda »

With regard to 'Driving the Ghost from the Machine' in Philosophy Now, consider an irresistible impulse in the context of someone being tortured. The impulse to stop the torture is well-nigh irresistible, so it is one of the poles on a continuum between maximum choice and minimum choice. Freedom to choose is circumstantial; and can't be all-or-nothing as for so-called 'Free Will'.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6657
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Driving the Ghost from the Machine

Post by Iwannaplato »

Philosophy Now wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 4:51 pm Alan Brody reviews The Metaphysics of Mind by Anthony Kenny.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/13/Dri ... he_Machine
I thought this was an odd comment...
Surely a desire to understand the mind in this way seems reasonable. Isn’t it plausible that some day artifacts (androids) entirely composed of the physical will be capable of human-like behaviour?
This wouldn't resolve anything. Perhaps their are philosophical zombies. Perhaps patterns of matter call to them patterns of immaterial 'stuff' or give rise to it.

The review also says...
Kenny wants to follow Ryle in ridding the bodily machine of the Cartesian ghost
What if the other direction is accurate: ridding the ghost of the Cartesian machine.
owl of Minerva
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:16 pm

Re: Driving the Ghost from the Machine

Post by owl of Minerva »

Belinda wrote: Mon Jan 23, 2023 7:49 pm With regard to 'Driving the Ghost from the Machine' in Philosophy Now, consider an irresistible impulse in the context of someone being tortured. The impulse to stop the torture is well-nigh irresistible, so it is one of the poles on a continuum between maximum choice and minimum choice. Freedom to choose is circumstantial; and can't be all-or-nothing as for so-called 'Free Will'.
A person being tortured not having the ability to stop the torture is not a realistic example for the non-existence of free will. A prisoner, for example, would have to be god-like, omnipotent to stop a torturer who by conviction has the will to torture. The prisoner’s mind may attempt to disassociate from the torture, that would be his only choice or he could confess, if guilty, or implicate others to end the torture. If he had an irresistible impulse, if he had wanted, to commit an act of terrorism that impulse must have come from a conviction which is a choice, unless he was forced to act under duress.
owl of Minerva
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:16 pm

Re: Driving the Ghost from the Machine

Post by owl of Minerva »

Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:00 am
Philosophy Now wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 4:51 pm Alan Brody reviews The Metaphysics of Mind by Anthony Kenny.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/13/Dri ... he_Machine
I thought this was an odd comment...
Surely a desire to understand the mind in this way seems reasonable. Isn’t it plausible that some day artifacts (androids) entirely composed of the physical will be capable of human-like behaviour?
This wouldn't resolve anything. Perhaps their are philosophical zombies. Perhaps patterns of matter call to them patterns of immaterial 'stuff' or give rise to it.

The review also says...
Kenny wants to follow Ryle in ridding the bodily machine of the Cartesian ghost
What if the other direction is accurate: ridding the ghost of the Cartesian machine.
Descartes may be right about the validly of the ghost. Its point of origin could not have been a topic of discussion or research in his day. Physicists have not, so far, reached consensus on whether the mind is elemental, whether its origin is at the emergence into actuality of individual quantum events. Although it is thought to be the case by some there is no clear evidence to prove it yet.

Descartes ‘multiple minds’ theory may also be valid. There has been a lot written on that topic. The reviewer rightly disagreed with the author’s take on ‘irresistible impulses’ being without any other viewpoint, the author having deemed that concept as metaphysical.

It would be a stretch to think of the mind in its entirety and complexity being transferred to an android. It would need to be understood in order to be duplicated, and if its emergence, or uncovering, at the human level required aeons of evolution and is still evolving only a robotic version could be transferred. As the reviewer pointed out a Mona Lisa type persona could exist in virtual reality but it would not know it existed and an identity could not be transferred to it.
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Driving the Ghost from the Machine

Post by Belinda »

owl of Minerva wrote: Wed Jan 25, 2023 3:35 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:00 am
Philosophy Now wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 4:51 pm Alan Brody reviews The Metaphysics of Mind by Anthony Kenny.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/13/Dri ... he_Machine
I thought this was an odd comment...
Surely a desire to understand the mind in this way seems reasonable. Isn’t it plausible that some day artifacts (androids) entirely composed of the physical will be capable of human-like behaviour?
This wouldn't resolve anything. Perhaps their are philosophical zombies. Perhaps patterns of matter call to them patterns of immaterial 'stuff' or give rise to it.

The review also says...
Kenny wants to follow Ryle in ridding the bodily machine of the Cartesian ghost
What if the other direction is accurate: ridding the ghost of the Cartesian machine.
Descartes may be right about the validly of the ghost. Its point of origin could not have been a topic of discussion or research in his day. Physicists have not, so far, reached consensus on whether the mind is elemental, whether its origin is at the emergence into actuality of individual quantum events. Although it is thought to be the case by some there is no clear evidence to prove it yet.

Descartes ‘multiple minds’ theory may also be valid. There has been a lot written on that topic. The reviewer rightly disagreed with the author’s take on ‘irresistible impulses’ being without any other viewpoint, the author having deemed that concept as metaphysical.

It would be a stretch to think of the mind in its entirety and complexity being transferred to an android. It would need to be understood in order to be duplicated, and if its emergence, or uncovering, at the human level required aeons of evolution and is still evolving only a robotic version could be transferred. As the reviewer pointed out a Mona Lisa type persona could exist in virtual reality but it would not know it existed and an identity could not be transferred to it.
There are no such things as extended matter, or mind. These are aspects of the same actual thing, nature. Sometimes we view nature from our perspectives as subjects of experience, and other times we view nature from our perspectives as objects of experience.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Driving the Ghost from the Machine

Post by attofishpi »

Philosophy Now wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 4:51 pm Alan Brody reviews The Metaphysics of Mind by Anthony Kenny.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/13/Dri ... he_Machine

The physical stuff of the brain (for example neurons, atoms, sub-atomic particles, waves) is not coloured and shaped into anything Mona Lisa-like. If we dissected the brain, we would not find a miniature Mona Lisa. But if we hold that the stuff of the brain can be identical with the virtual Mona Lisa then – at the time that that type of thing exists – it must, to be that type of thing, have properties that make it Mona Lisa-like. And that means that it must be coloured and shaped like the Mona Lisa. But brain states do not occur in the form of coloured, shaped Mona Lisa-like entities. So, the Mona Lisa-like entity cannot be identical with the physical and must instead be an entity of a different sort.
I found the above paragraph interesting.

For me, "brain states" must have some identifiable correlation to what a brain is conceiving within the mind's eye. As known currently, human brains appear to have identifiable regions pertaining to functioning of the body parts and thought processes - rather low level, not in anyway detailed enough to consider that ..'hey, this mind's eye is currently thinking of the image of the Mona Lisa!" - but we can't rule out in the future that some form of technology may be able to analyse a LIVING conscious brain and determine such a thing (no pun intended).
owl of Minerva
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:16 pm

Re: Driving the Ghost from the Machine

Post by owl of Minerva »

Belinda wrote: Wed Jan 25, 2023 8:34 pm
owl of Minerva wrote: Wed Jan 25, 2023 3:35 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:00 am
I thought this was an odd comment...
This wouldn't resolve anything. Perhaps their are philosophical zombies. Perhaps patterns of matter call to them patterns of immaterial 'stuff' or give rise to it.

The review also says...

What if the other direction is accurate: ridding the ghost of the Cartesian machine.
Descartes may be right about the validly of the ghost. Its point of origin could not have been a topic of discussion or research in his day. Physicists have not, so far, reached consensus on whether the mind is elemental, whether its origin is at the emergence into actuality of individual quantum events. Although it is thought to be the case by some there is no clear evidence to prove it yet.

Descartes ‘multiple minds’ theory may also be valid. There has been a lot written on that topic. The reviewer rightly disagreed with the author’s take on ‘irresistible impulses’ being without any other viewpoint, the author having deemed that concept as metaphysical.

It would be a stretch to think of the mind in its entirety and complexity being transferred to an android. It would need to be understood in order to be duplicated, and if its emergence, or uncovering, at the human level required aeons of evolution and is still evolving only a robotic version could be transferred. As the reviewer pointed out a Mona Lisa type persona could exist in virtual reality but it would not know it existed and an identity could not be transferred to it.
There are no such things as extended matter, or mind. These are aspects of the same actual thing, nature. Sometimes we view nature from our perspectives as subjects of experience, and other times we view nature from our perspectives as objects of experience.
If the mind is the sixth sense, the inner sense that coordinates the outer five there is no reason to believe it to be other than physical, a part of nature. Physicists have not reached a consensus on that yet although it is on their radar. It is the case that we can view nature subjectively or objectively, although our viewpoint has no bearing on what it ultimately is, as the saying goes, ‘it is what is is.

Eventually it will be known what the mind is and why it has the ability to be both subjective and objective, knowing its own inner state as well its immediate environment through the senses. It is body identified and cannot ordinarily extend its knowledge beyond these two modes of knowing. It can extend its reach into the further reaches of space with the aid of the instruments it creates and through abstract thought, a function of intelligence.

It has also been said, if I am quoting correctly: ‘A rose is nothing more than whirling vortexes until man’s mind turns it into a rose.’
Post Reply