IanRaugh wrote:SpeedOfSound wrote:GrahamH wrote:SpeedOfSound wrote:Graham will continue to pedantically seize every such use of language and take this 'higher ground' with you. Then when someone turns it on him he is all butt-hurt.
Funny, coming from the hypocritical pedant who uses language of the mind so sloppily himself
SpeedOfSound wrote:All of these issues and arguments over the silliness of talking about the brain with the language of mind.
Well. No. I don't do that all and this just highlights your lack of understanding of the project. No surprise there.
Here is perhaps a question based on a post I did not see from earlier in the thread:
Why are we approaching the conscious versus unconscious states as logic versus emotion? I tend to think of them as degrees of arousal. The more concentration a thought requires, it is done with our conscious mind. Something easy and automatic would be done by our unconscious. Emotional or logical, to me, doesn't even enter into the equation.
This way, we can use both the language of the brain and the language of the mind (as long as we are careful about our terminology) to accurately describe what is happening. They are, after all,
the same thing.
The 'project' I am undertaking is to question all of our language and presuppositions about the mind. Not having much luck, at least around here, getting it off the ground. In particular I am become displeased, very much, with the word unconscious.
So to get a start, one must toss out all presuppositions and reformulate every word from our 'mind-domain'. UE in the other thread loves to blabber the battlecry of the woo; "science doesn't have a theory of consciousness". I would reformulate that as "no one knows exactly what they mean when they say consciousness". Nothing to do with science. It is more to do with our presuppositions about mind that are based in the nature of our brains and the language that develops around it. I INSIST on a dark dividing line between the two domains and a fresh look at the whole project.
I had thought that I swept my house clean of religion just a few years back. I am a lifelong atheist. Yet, the more I looked, the more religious bias I found at the core of those ideas I am culturally bred to.
I draw two circles. One is the physical description of the organism and the world it finds itself in. The other is statements or noises the organism makes about itself. When you hear the word 'consciousness' imagine that you are observing some little chipmunk thing squawking the noise. Try and imagine a physical description of what makes him squawk just so.
When I read GrahamH I hear "Eooooowwkkk! Wokkk eep-eep ugga-mooook!". Then I try and imagine the physical description for his utterance. ( I read about 3% of his posts because it's hard work deriving these physical descriptions of the battle cry of the low-hanging ape )
by 
