Diana:
just a couple of thoughts on "computational theory of mind" - this is still
a current, viable hypothesis, but you are right that it is not proposed that
the edifice is completely re-programmable; it is, as you say, proposed that
there are computational 'centres' which deal with specific types of
information, communicate laterally and so on. Certainly, the human brain is
the most behaviourally-flexible brain that we know of, but not infinitely
so. You can't actually decide not to see the colour 'red' for arguments
sake, and this does of course have implications for the notion of 'freewill'
, 'absolute' freewill, and so on.
A good reference, and certainly readable for anyone on this list, would be
Stephen Pinker, "How the Mind Works". 1997. - brilliantly indexed, a bit
long.
On Causation: Karl Popper, who, as a brilliant philosopher-of-science, has
severe doubts about the notion that the universe runs according to what he
calls 'push causality'. A short, readable book would be : "A World of
Propensities" 1990
On "substance" : well, everyone's written on this, from Democritus onwards.
Whether the basic 'stuff' of the universe is matter, energy, space and time,
seems extraordinarily hard to pin down. My own way of dealing with this is
to propose, as a methodological convenience, the notion that "information"
is not a 'property' of matter, energy flows and so on, but quite the other
way round. That is, the basic 'stuff' of the universe is actually
information, and all else is 'properties' thereof.
I'm not sure if this is what Pirsig is proposing with Quality,...?
regrds,
ppl
----- Original Message -----
From: <diana@hongkong.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: 01 March 2000 08:53
Subject: MD Problems with Pirsig
> MOqdis
>
> The slow reading of the first 3 chapters of LILA is
> about to begin over on moq_focus. Before we begin
> I'll just point out what I think is wrong with the book
> and what I hope our reading of it will resolve.
>
> Lila is over four hundred pages long, but still Pirsig
> only has time to sketch out a metaphysics. The problems
> I have with his work mainly relate to the big
> philosophical questions which are touched on but not
> explained in anything like the depth that they require.
> We tend to ask specific questions in this group, which
> is fine, but then we get caught in traps because we
> don't really know how to deal with the underlying
> metaphysics and Pirsig imo just doesn't offer enough
> explanation to support the claims he makes.
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:39 BST