RE: on the matter of mind

To Chris,
I don't know any of the Deleuze list people personally but I am
trying to understand most of what has been going on.  This question
is to Chris regarding your recent post that the word 'mind' auto-
matically brings transcendence into the conversation.  Would you 
say that this holds for, say, John Searle's view as expressed
in Rediscovery of the Mind?  Searle holds that the mind just is
what the brain does.  He uses the term "mind" but I don't think
he means anything transcendent by it, and certainly he is no
dualist.  Does what you say imply that Searle shouldn't use
the term "mind"?  Or have I misunderstood you?
Judy Miles
Cal Poly Pomona

     ------------------