[FRIAM] Peirce, Buddhism, Monism, Behaviorism, oh my!
Jochen Fromm
jofr at cas-group.net
Thu Jun 2 16:22:35 EDT 2022
The problem is that there are cases where we are not sure if we can apply the label real or not. For a physicist a physical body is real, like a person, a book, a tree, a glass of water, a cat, a mouse, etc. A physical body hasas a weight and an extension that can be measured. It has a mass and can be touched. Wizards, witches, unicorns or flying horses that appear in Harry Potter stories are not real. If we see them in a movie they seem to be real, but they are obviously invented by J.K. Rowling, J.R.R Tolkien and their predecessors.Subjective experiences and feelings are real, because they are ultimately based on physiological processes like hormone levels, blood pressure and neurotransmitters concentrations like Serotonin, Dopamine, Norepinephrine, Acetylcholine, etc. The idea of a single central place in the brain where subjective experience happens is unreal, as Daniel Dennett explains in "Consciousness explained" and Jay Garfield in "Losing Ourselves".The interesting cases are the ones that are real and unreal at the same time, like the rainbow that emerges from waterdroplets which are hit by light rays. Or the projection of a 4-dimensional cube on a 2-dimensional piece of paper. Or the historical movie which is authentic and yet illusionary.-J.
-------- Original message --------From: Nicholas Thompson <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> Date: 6/1/22 03:04 (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Peirce, Buddhism, Monism, Behaviorism, oh my! Thanks for these comments, JOCHEN.I think Garfield’s point was that there is nothing but experience, So the problem is, what is the special character of experiences to which we apply the label real.NickSent from my Dumb PhoneOn May 31, 2022, at 4:00 PM, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:Interesting episode. Yes, Garfield apparently uses it to advertise his book. I like the mirage example he uses (at 11:00) to illustrate an illusion which is real as an experience and as a dynamic refraction process but unreal as a physical substance. https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691220284/losing-ourselvesDaniel Dennett recently posted on Twitter a link to an article which contains the same idea, but for a rainbow instead of a mirage: perceiving a rainbow is a real experience of a colored arc, but also an illusion because there is of course no real physical arc at the place where we see it. https://www.keithfrankish.com/2022/05/like-a-rainbow/Maybe the illusion of the self works indeed in the same way? As whole persons who have bodies and brains we are real, just as raindrops in the sky are real. But when the billions of neurons start to sparkle in the light of conscious thoughts, the experience of a self emerges for a short time like a rainbow which emerges shortly from a million raindrops that bend the light towards the observer.I believe Jay Garfield is right when he says that we are able to construct ourselves as embedded beings. It is as if we are 6, 7 or 8 dimensional beings in a 4 dimensional spacetime where the additional dimensions are embedded in the others. This additional dimensions come through language and enable to specify a personality. If we consider a person from a 3rd person point of view, then the personality of a person certainly determines the behavior. This means everyone has a self in form of a character or personality. Even if it is illusionary or an unreachable ideal to be a certain type of person, such a type can be approximated. Our personalities can be considered as embedded abstract person types that we acquire and approximate in the course of time. In this sense we can say we have a self that guides our actions. And the abstract type is independent from us, since it could also be implemented in a sophisticated robot, android or AI.-J.-------- Original message --------From: thompnickson2 at gmail.com Date: 5/31/22 11:04 (GMT+01:00) To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <friam at redfish.com> Cc: 'Mike Bybee' <mikebybee at earthlink.net>, stephenraronson at gmail.com, 'Grant Franks' <grantfranks3 at gmail.com> Subject: [FRIAM] Peirce, Buddhism, Monism, Behaviorism, oh my! https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/282-do-you-really-have-a-self/id733163012?i=1000563340865 Jay Garfield promotes his book Losing the Self on the Sam Harris Podcast. I can see no evidence that Garfield ever read a word of Peirce, but It’s fascinating how closely he tracks Peirce’s monism. Fascinating, also, to see how Harris never quite gets it, repeatedly trying to drag the outside/inside distinction back into the conversation, while slathering praise on Garfield for eliminating it. Reminds me of James’s failure to ever quite “get” Peirce. But then it was James who died a neutral monist. Oh well. Reminded me of all the times that Dave West has accused me of being a closet Buddhist. Nick Nick ThompsonThompNickSon2 at gmail.comhttps://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listservFridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom bit.ly/virtualfriamun/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comFRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20220602/cc8d1c42/attachment.html>
More information about the Friam
mailing list