tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post109973562325427725..comments2023-10-29T10:32:36.914-04:00Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: The Cartesian TheatreRichard Y Chappellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-80307486349843938012012-08-07T10:19:46.273-04:002012-08-07T10:19:46.273-04:00Hello. I was browsing to understand the notion of ...Hello. I was browsing to understand the notion of the "Cartesian theater" and saw this post from 2004. I may be writing in the non-present past. But I just wanted to express gratitude for the post and the Dennett quote as I'm in the throes of explaining an intuition regarding the (secondary) causal properties of X in the future. The future appears to have a teleologic potential that all my faith in evolution, for example, canĀ“t quite dispel. That observation regarding the timelessness in minute registration of elements of the stream of consciousness gives me a clue that I'll try to use. Give me any help you can! (burstein@laneta.apc.org) Thanks!jnbwhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06378513759425425341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-51660558716217384442012-02-25T19:00:32.319-05:002012-02-25T19:00:32.319-05:00If there were a homunculus in your head which is t...If there were a homunculus in your head which is the 'actual observer' of your conscious experience, and you were to have an experience which caused you to doubt your senses, you would be in the difficult position of having to explain why some of your subjective experiences are 'real' and some are not. Dennett is essentially saying that this is an unnecessary distinction; instead we should treat the subjective experience (as narrated by the subject) as the true account of 'what it is like to be the subject' - after all, who better to provide that data? He spends some time talking about 'heterophenomenology', i.e. the facts of experience related by others: facts in the sense that the subject claims to have had them, and the subject is the only authority on the matter. This does not mean that subjective experience is objectively true, in the same way as the fact of the existence of a fictional Sherlock Holmes is not the same as the existence of a real one.<br /><br />"It is true that you experienced it" and "it is true" make sense (and are independent); "it is not true that you experienced it even though you think you did" does not make sense.David Turnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14738491011019732316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-27168101901462910472010-01-10T17:18:29.373-05:002010-01-10T17:18:29.373-05:00"Lastly, there is a philosophical problem, in..."Lastly, there is a philosophical problem, in that Cartesian materialism commits one to uphold the appearance/reality distinction even about the subjective. That is, it implies that there is a difference between that which really seems to be so, and that which merely seems to seem to be so."<br /><br />I don't understand this one bit.shagbarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07759080646499030919noreply@blogger.com