Different in degree or kind: An essay captures Adler (Introduction)

by David Turell , Friday, November 20, 2015, 01:11 (3081 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw: And that is my point. If an aged, diseased or drugged brain can change “you”, how can we say with any conviction that the “you” is an immaterial being that controls the brain? If the brain is “normal”, it may control the person “normally”. -Just the other way 'round. It is only when the brain is sick that the person loses control. Just when does your brain control you? Does it write your plays?-> dhw: We simply do not know what makes “you”, regardless of the fact that you “feel” fully in control.-True. But our ignorance of the mechanism does not mean that anything goes. My impression is I run my brain. No one can prove the opposite, since we don't understand the mechanism. I'll take my viewpoint, as anything else is unprovable.-> 
> dhw: The original post and your comment that our fellow animals have “a degree of immaterial thought” make it plain that our degree is (vastly) greater than theirs, and if you believe that we and apes had a common ancestor, “specially created” sounds like a contradiction in terms.-I don't see your contradiction. It is the vastness of the difference that makes us different in kind. And he doesn't mention the anatomical changes which are also vast. -> dhw: I can't believe that they really mean cells are automatons. I then feel free to speculate on the possible implications of their observations.-Shapiro says that the bacteria's genome is a 'read/write code' mechanism. How do you interpret that?