XPost: alt.philosophy, alt.atheism, talk.atheism
From: Reanimater_2000@yahoo.com
"Craig Franck" wrote in message
news:Oq5Nf.7351$Gw2.6230@trndny03...
> "Immortalist" wrote
>
>> "Joseph H" wrote
>
>>> What is this thing called self?
>>>
>>> Is it.......
>>>
>>
>> the activities of particular nerve cells, but not the nerve cells
>> themselves?
>>
>> like the sheen and smooth qualities of water when we see through
>> magnification that it is just grainy atoms
>>
>> like the melody of many instruments playing together, that something that
>> vanishes when they play seperately
>>
>> a biological process that happens when nerve cells are active
>
> From all that you provided at the end of this post I'm sure you are
> aware this is a complicated issue, but identifying the "self" as
> activities of brain cells or even biological structures is the wrong level
> of abstraction.
>
If someone asks me what sentences consist of and I answer words and letters
are you going to say that I am at the wrong or right level of abstraction?
Or are you going to say that the only way to find out what a sentence is is
to compare it to other sentences and imagine we that can ignore words,
letters, paragraphs, sections and chapters?
> To have a self you most likely need a body, but even this, as Merleau-
> Ponty has pointed out, requires an elaborate theory of perception that
> functions unconsciously in most persons. Knowing that you can't hear
> my thoughts or stubbing your toe won't cause me pain probably can't
> be expressed as simple neuronal patterns, and this is still at the
> relatively primitive phase of body/environment distinction.
>
Actually if you took everything away from a body but nerve cells you would
see the shape of the entire body. But I agree with you that the necessary
conditions for experience are converged upon by the activities of nerves,
bodies and the world.
> True Self-ness requires a full-blown theory at least as elaborate as
> Catholic theology. (Simply explaining why one body can or can't have
> multiple selves would require an essay-length treatment. The same
> is true for Buddhist self vs. Western self.)
>
From the evidence of neurology and neurophysiology the best theory is that
this self-ness (IS) the activities of particular nerve cells only. But I
agree that events external to and influential upon these particular nerve
cells may be necessary if the complex is to converge upon one possible way
to create human experience.
> So calling an elaborate social fiction the activities of brain cells just
> means all mental activity is most likely brain activity which isn't
> particularly useful as an explanation.
>
THe subject was "what is the self" not what influences the self. But I agree
that bodies and the world are necessary for the complex to converge upon the
discovery of experience.
Take away the world and and the self fades like when people float in water
with all their sensory apperatus blinded.
Sensory deprivation is the deliberate reduction or removal of stimuli from
one or more of the senses. Simple devices such as blindfolds and earmuffs
can cut off sight and hearing, while more complex devices can also cut off
the sense of smell, touch, taste, thermoception (heat-sense), and 'gravity'.
Sensory deprivation has been used in various alternative medicines and in
psychological experiments (e.g., see Isolation tank), and for torture or
punishment.
Though short periods of sensory deprivation can be relaxing, extended
deprivation can result in extreme anxiety, hallucinations, bizarre thoughts,
depression, and antisocial behavior.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensory_deprivation
> --
> Craig Franck
> craig.franck@verizon.net
> Cortland, NY
>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
