Gregg:
Thanks -- I intend to participate in whatever discussions arise on the
ToK list (perhaps by saying nothing.)
What I will not participate in is a discussion elsewhere about John
Horgan's book (the themes of which I've already discussed with him at
some length in person) . . . <g>
Mark
Quoting "Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx" <[log in to unmask]>:
> Thanks, Mark.
>
> As you noted, you don't need to follow the conversation, so feel
> free to hit delete on this topic line.
>
> Best,
> Gregg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tree of knowledge system discussion
> <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Mark Stahlman
> Sent: Monday, October 8, 2018 12:04 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: A book club invitation to explore mind-body problems
>
> Gregg:
>
> Needless to say, for most people, their "philosophy" is superficial
> and not fundamental. It is something they have adopted as a result
> of the psycho-technological environment in which their "behaviors
> and attitudes" have been formed. Socrates taught us that a long
> time ago.
>
> Nowadays, among "philosophers," many of these basic questions are
> once-again being widely debated -- reflecting the shift to DIGITAL.
> No, John Horgan isn't one of them (and neither are you.) And, for
> what its worth, Will Durant wasn't a historian either . . . <g>
>
> I was initially invited to speak at the recent "XXIVth World Congress
> on Philosophy: Learning to be Human" in Beijing but couldn't go.
> Taking a look at the agenda might be helpful for you to sort out
> what the *actual* philosophers are talking about today --
> particularly the fascinating topic of "post-humanity" (a round-table
> about which I was invited to join by the NYU group who focuses on
> this.)
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Posthumanism&d=DwIDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=O7dzx_qkMFoNo6kX1hB5wRvqlC7_Fc0kAsDunxh96Tg&s=mqkSX2FHsPirpPWPsFxAcL420q_9-zLR-ADYJslSRzo&e=
>
> Whether "confused dualist" or "property quadism" are even relevant
> in all this is an interesting question (probably not.) What views
> were thrown-up by ELECTRICITY (the previous paradigm) and which ones
> will be thrown-up by DIGITAL (since we are "constructed" by
> technology, not the other way around) now becomes an important one
> to sort out . . . !!
>
> Mark
>
> Quoting "Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx" <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>> Hi Waldemar,
>>
>> Great question regarding the book. Since listening to Will Durant's
>> The Story of Philosophy, I have become even more convinced that what
>> we in the academy are missing is an effective way to talk about
>> mind-body/mind-matter issues. This is the SAME basic issue that has
>> prevented the field of psychology from being a coherent discipline.
>> That is, "Mind-Body Problems" = The Problem of Psychology.
>>
>> Horgan's book is useful for several reasons. First, the book is free
>> and easily available on line. Second, it is written in an easy style
>> that does not require much technical knowledge. Third, it is written
>> in a manner parallel to the Story of Philosophy, in that it profiles
>> both scholars and their ideas, a different one in each chapter--a
>> format I think is helpful and useful. That gives rise to a fourth
>> reason, namely that it is a broad treatment of the issues.
>> Fifth, I found that I could just copy and paste the chapters into a
>> word document and thus engage in running commentary of the chapter in
>> a word document and share that with others. This will allow for a much
>> more fine grained analysis of the text and clear exposition regarding
>> what is going on.
>>
>> The hope is to show folks that how Horgan talks about mind-body is
>> very confused. And the way he talks is the way we talk in general. So
>> it is a great example of our common social construction of these
>> issues. As such, Horgan's style should be easily relatable, and thus
>> allow folks to empathize and "see what he sees."
>>
>> Then I can use his style to show that it is his
>> linguistic/conceptual/preconceived notions about the world that drives
>> much of his confusion. That is, he has an implicit metaphysical system
>> that is revealed in how he talks about these issues. To be direct
>> about it, Horgan is a confused dualist (as are so many people). In
>> contrast, the ToK is a coherent "property quadist" view. I will be
>> able to use him as an example of what a confused dualist language game
>> looks like and why, if you operate off of that, you will indeed by
>> confused by the mind-body problems.
>>
>> However, if you learn to speak ToK/UTUA, the knotty problems that are
>> all tied up in a ball when you are a confused implicit dualist become
>> loosened and clarity is achieved. That is not to say there are no
>> problems left. For example, what I call "the hard-engineering problem"
>> remains. This refers to the connection/relationship between
>> neurophysiological mechanical processes and the emergence of
>> subjective experience that are binded together in our perceptual field
>> of awareness. I do not have an answer to that problem directly
>> (although progress is being made). However, that is only one of the
>> problems that Horgan is all tangled up about. I will show how his
>> naïve dualism is working against him and how we can do better...much
>> better.
>>
>> Best,
>> Gregg
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tree of knowledge system discussion
>> <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD,
>> MD
>> Sent: Sunday, October 7, 2018 9:11 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: A book club invitation to explore mind-body problems
>>
>> Gregg:
>>
>> I accept your invitation.
>> May I ask, what led you to choose this particular work?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Waldemar
>>
>> Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD
>> (Perseveret et Percipiunt)
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On Oct 7, 2018, at 9:56 AM, Mark Stahlman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Gregg:
>>>
>>> I know John Horgan quite well. He is a pretty standard "hippie"
>>> who keeps reaching for hallucinogens &c as-if this was still the
>>> 1960s. Creative writing and all that.
>>>
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__blogs.scientific
>>> american.com_cross-2Dcheck_yes-2Dmake-2Dpsychedelics-2Dlegally-2Davai
>>> lable-2Dbut-2Ddont-2Dforget-2Dthe-2Drisks_&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgm
>>> b7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2g
>>> Oz4-A&m=s-R6M6hfOGoi0XNEPzL4ZP_EN3HsB7oqp1rr1qezSjI&s=MVELN_kfJpMKxxN
>>> 0p73C4ZXWbOKPNW4LWlOcX5QenTg&e=
>>>
>>> Alas, that was the old paradigm. He has no interest in the *new* one
>>> (so I will not be commenting) . . . <g>
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> Quoting "Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx" <[log in to unmask]>:
>>>
>>>> Hi List,
>>>> I am inviting folks to join me on a book club conversation. The
>>>> book is free and on-line. It is John Horgan's Mind Body
>>>> Problems<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mindbo
>>>> dyproblems.com_&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=s-R6M6hfOGoi0XNEPzL4ZP_EN3HsB7oqp1rr1qezSjI&s=cLOLF8DF4D-hNinQV0_ulxiDQ8I6DoFv4eGKM_Ky09Y&e=>. I have started reading it and will offer a summary of one chapter each week. The first chapter is Introduction: The Weirdness. <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mindbodyproblems.com_introduction_&d=DwIBaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=s-R6M6hfOGoi0XNEPzL4ZP_EN3HsB7oqp1rr1qezSjI&s=UYxDdWcxnEXxGa0rZAEGkNh4tcQoaGJjmpQRgZ3EMls&e=> It is not too long, just over 4,000 words. On Friday, I will offer a summary of it and some
>>>> commentary.
>>>>
>>>> The book gives us an opportunity as a group to grapple with the
>>>> mind-body problem(s) and to engage in conversations about what it
>>>> is, and how we might understand it going forward. As you will see,
>>>> Horgan defines the problem very broadly. As such, it is very
>>>> relevant for a Theory Of Knowledge. And it is also quite relevant
>>>> for the ToK/UTUA framework. If the ToK/UTUA Framework is valid, it
>>>> has much to say about the mind-body problems. The nature of the
>>>> problems look very different.
>>>>
>>>> I hope you will join me and chime in with your own thoughts.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Gregg
>>>>
>>>> ############################
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
>>>> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
>>>> or click the following link:
>>>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>>
>>> ############################
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
>>> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
>>> or click the following link:
>>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
>> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
>> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
> or click the following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
> or click the following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
|
