20 ideas
5791 | Reduction is either by elimination, or by explanation [Searle] |
5799 | Eliminative reduction needs a gap between appearance and reality, as in sunsets [Searle] |
5790 | A property is 'emergent' if it is caused by elements of a system, when the elements lack the property [Searle] |
5792 | Explanation of how we unify our mental stimuli into a single experience is the 'binding problem' [Searle] |
5786 | A system is either conscious or it isn't, though the intensity varies a lot [Searle] |
5794 | Consciousness has a first-person ontology, which only exists from a subjective viewpoint [Searle] |
5795 | There isn't one consciousness (information-processing) which can be investigated, and another (phenomenal) which can't [Searle] |
5788 | The use of 'qualia' seems to imply that consciousness and qualia are separate [Searle] |
2599 | Either intentionality causes things, or epiphenomenalism is true [Fodor] |
5789 | I now think syntax is not in the physics, but in the eye of the beholder [Searle] |
5798 | Consciousness has a first-person ontology, so it cannot be reduced without omitting something [Searle] |
2597 | Contrary to the 'anomalous monist' view, there may well be intentional causal laws [Fodor] |
5787 | There is non-event causation between mind and brain, as between a table and its solidity [Searle] |
5797 | The pattern of molecules in the sea is much more complex than the complexity of brain neurons [Searle] |
5796 | If tree rings contain information about age, then age contains information about rings [Searle] |
2598 | Lots of physical properties are multiply realisable, so why shouldn't beliefs be? [Fodor] |
7260 | If there are intuited moral facts, why should we care about them? [Dancy,J] |
7261 | Internalists say that moral intuitions are motivating; externalist say a desire is also needed [Dancy,J] |
7262 | Obviously judging an action as wrong gives us a reason not to do it [Dancy,J] |
7265 | Moral facts are not perceived facts, but perceived reasons for judgements [Dancy,J] |