dear mark,
i thought this was really interesting, specially on the issues
of intuition and responsibility- did you think though that Churchland's
criteria for normality were still how to be a good (but sedentary)
captilalist? i also wonder how the essential hardwiring would stand up to
cross-cultural analysis-i have seen some other work linking temporal lobe
damage to schizophrenia and to mysticism if you would like me to send.
Ruth.C
N.B re Tess-something of a noble savage?-perhaps this is where the
aesthetics of selection informing KAP's vitalism differs from D?
>>> Mark Crosby <Crosby_M@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 01/07 5:00 pm >>>
Meant to add this reference, in case anyone is
interested:
"Feeling Reasons", Patricia Smith Churchland,
Philosophy Department and Salk Institute, UCSD, La
Jolla California, 1997 ARS Electronica, Fleshfactor
SubStrata.
http://www.aec.at/fleshfactor/subs/reasons.html
1. Introduction - The Social Significance of Agent
Autonomy and Responsibility
2. Are we responsible and in control if our choices
and actions are caused?
3. Are we more in control and more responsible to the
degree that emotions plays a lesser role and reason
plays a greater role?
4. Are there significant neurobiological differences
between "in control" agents, and "out of control"
agents?
5. Learning what's rational and what's not.
6. What Happens to the Concept of Responsibility?
P.S. Ruth, let me think about it over the weekend...
Thanks, Mark
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
