Saturday, January 29, 2011

Fourth Comment on ENV - "A One Hundred Year Old Challenge" (reply to Egnor)

Hash: SHA1

Good to see you're back!

You're comment reminds me of an article you did for Salvo, "What Happens When You Write
Positive Blog Posts About ID?" I'm sure it must feel like target practice for the mods right now.

I have a question though about how you define "dualism." You said before that dualism predicts
that "If the brain is damaged, then mental function will not necessarily be damaged,"
as well as, "We will not always be able to correlate brain activity with mental activity -- no matter
how we choose to look at it."

Am I no longer a dualist if I allow the possibility that the mind uses the brain to manifest itself?
For example, if I damage the brain the mind itself is intact but cannot express itself through the
brain as well - and insisting we can only detect mental activity through brain activity?

Is this consistent with dualism when you view the brain as a vehicle but the mind is the
driver - damage the car, inhibit the driver? Or must I call myself a property dualist to make that

I ask this because it seems like you've phrased dualism to mean it won't matter at all if there's
brain damage; the mind will still be able to perform physical tasks regardless of brain damage.
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (MingW32)


No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments that aren't encrypted with my key and are also digitally signed with sender's own key go to the trash. I might skim them for lulz though...

This is the policy given to me by Janus. They don't agree with my views, but since they are willing to protect my real identity this is the least I can do in return.

Crypto-IDEA WA: Don't waste your time here. We have a far more cryptographically secure outpost than this one...