more on this theme     |     more from this text


Single Idea 18403

[filed under theme 18. Thought / A. Modes of Thought / 9. Indexical Thought ]

Full Idea

Even if the indexical is not an objective fact about the world, it is a fact about the world as I find it, and it is the world as I find it that needs explanation.

Gist of Idea

Indexicals may not be objective, but they are a fact about the world as I see it

Source

David J.Chalmers (The Conscious Mind [1996], 1.2.5)

Book Ref

Chalmers,David J.: 'The Conscious Mind' [OUP 1997], p.85


A Reaction

Chalmers treats them as important, whereas the way he expresses it could make them eliminable, if the world seen by him is eliminable.


The 57 ideas from David J.Chalmers

Modal Rationalism: conceivability gives a priori access to modal truths [Chalmers, by Stalnaker]
Evaluate primary possibility from some world, and secondary possibility from this world [Chalmers, by Vaidya]
Rationalist 2D semantics posits necessary relations between meaning, apriority, and possibility [Chalmers, by Schroeter]
Phenomenal consciousness is fundamental, with no possible nonphenomenal explanation [Chalmers, by Kriegel/Williford]
Hard Problem: why brains experience things [Chalmers]
We attribute beliefs to people in order to explain their behaviour [Chalmers]
Sometimes we don't notice our pains [Chalmers]
Can we be aware but not conscious? [Chalmers]
Properties supervene if you can't have one without the other [Chalmers]
Logical supervenience is when one set of properties must be accompanied by another set [Chalmers]
Natural supervenience is when one set of properties is always accompanied by another set [Chalmers]
Zombies imply natural but not logical supervenience [Chalmers]
Reductive explanation is not the be-all and the end-all of explanation [Chalmers]
'Perception' means either an action or a mental state [Chalmers]
Reduction requires logical supervenience [Chalmers]
Kripke is often taken to be challenging a priori insights into necessity [Chalmers]
Maybe logical possibility does imply conceivability - by an ideal mind [Chalmers]
In two-dimensional semantics we have two aspects to truth in virtue of meaning [Chalmers]
Two-dimensional semantics gives a 'primary' and 'secondary' proposition for each statement [Chalmers]
The 'primary intension' is non-empirical, and fixes extensions based on the actual-world reference [Chalmers]
Meaning has split into primary ("watery stuff"), and secondary counterfactual meaning ("H2O") [Chalmers]
The 'secondary intension' is determined by rigidifying (as H2O) the 'water' picked out in the actual world [Chalmers]
Primary and secondary intensions are the a priori (actual) and a posteriori (counterfactual) aspects of meaning [Chalmers]
We have 'primary' truth-conditions for the actual world, and derived 'secondary' ones for counterfactual worlds [Chalmers]
Indexicals may not be objective, but they are a fact about the world as I see it [Chalmers]
Is intentionality just causal connections? [Chalmers]
All facts are either physical, experiential, laws of nature, second-order final facts, or indexical facts about me [Chalmers]
Physicalism says in any two physically indiscernible worlds the positive facts are the same [Chalmers, by Bennett,K]
It seems possible to invert qualia [Chalmers]
Nothing in physics even suggests consciousness [Chalmers]
Nothing external shows whether a mouse is conscious [Chalmers]
H2O causes liquidity, but no one is a dualist about that [Chalmers]
Perhaps consciousness is physically based, but not logically required by that base [Chalmers]
One can wrongly imagine two things being non-identical even though they are the same (morning/evening star) [Chalmers]
How can we know the metaphysical impossibilities; the a posteriori only concerns this world [Chalmers]
Metaphysical necessity is a bizarre, brute and inexplicable constraint on possibilities [Chalmers]
Strong metaphysical necessity allows fewer possible worlds than logical necessity [Chalmers]
Presumably God can do anything which is logically possible [Chalmers]
Maybe dualist interaction is possible at the quantum level? [Chalmers]
Supervenience makes interaction laws possible [Chalmers]
If I can have a zombie twin, my own behaviour doesn't need consciousness [Chalmers]
Can we explain behaviour without consciousness? [Chalmers]
When distracted we can totally misjudge our own experiences [Chalmers]
In blindsight both qualia and intentionality are missing [Chalmers]
What turns awareness into consciousness? [Chalmers]
Does consciousness arise from fine-grained non-reductive functional organisation? [Chalmers]
The Chinese Mind doesn't seem conscious, but then nor do brains from outside [Chalmers]
Why should qualia fade during silicon replacement? [Chalmers]
The structure of the retina has already simplified the colour information which hits it [Chalmers]
Going down the scale, where would consciousness vanish? [Chalmers]
It is odd if experience is a very recent development [Chalmers]
Why are minds homogeneous and brains fine-grained? [Chalmers]
Maybe the whole Chinese Room understands Chinese, though the person doesn't [Chalmers]
Temperature (etc.) is agreed to be reducible, but it is multiply realisable [Chalmers]
A sentence is a priori if no possible way the world might actually be could make it false [Chalmers]
Truth in a scenario is the negation in that scenario being a priori incoherent [Chalmers]
'Water' is two-dimensionally inconstant, with different intensions in different worlds [Chalmers, by Sider]