tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post3779805136605814571..comments2024-03-28T12:34:14.649-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: Feser on DretskeVictor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-2834771684531271992010-09-23T08:25:25.303-07:002010-09-23T08:25:25.303-07:00Oh well, I guess the entertainment is over.Oh well, I guess the entertainment is over.Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-60437365469984742762010-09-21T16:29:52.371-07:002010-09-21T16:29:52.371-07:00Well it would be interesting to see your critical ...Well it would be interesting to see your critical feedback interacting with Feser's ideas & responses.<br /><br />Cheers again.BenYachovhttp://www.catholic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-24433108274568100712010-09-21T15:31:49.059-07:002010-09-21T15:31:49.059-07:00BY: Yes, maybe I will drop by his blog. I'd ha...BY: Yes, maybe I will drop by his blog. I'd have to formulate my thoughts more clearly what I wrote above was off the cuff first impression.Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-24654016037545729902010-09-21T14:35:51.460-07:002010-09-21T14:35:51.460-07:00Wait don't mind me!
I'm still channelin...Wait don't mind me! <br /><br />I'm still channeling TLS. Your referring to the actual post of this thread!!!!!<br /><br />My bad! Forget I said anything (accept the part about dropping by).BenYachovhttp://www.catholic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-58052172262240046312010-09-21T14:32:41.796-07:002010-09-21T14:32:41.796-07:00>I frankly have no clue what he means when he s...>I frankly have no clue what he means when he says that an Aristotelian view would help Dretske out of this problem as well. Dretske has some problems, but it seems Feser's aren't all that deadly.<br /><br />I reply: I'm going to take a shot in the dark here with my obvious ignorance compared to your superior knowledge BDK. Feser is a moderate realist & not a conceptionalist or nominalist.<br /><br />Maybe that is relevant?BenYachovhttp://www.catholic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-27616827860986314802010-09-21T14:25:24.695-07:002010-09-21T14:25:24.695-07:00@BDK
BDK you should stop by his blog and offer yo...@BDK<br /><br />BDK you should stop by his blog and offer your thoughts & debate sometime. Feser has a soft spot for thoughtful Atheists (he debated David Ramsay Steele (author of Atheism Explained) and lauded him a gentlemen.<br /><br />Cheers.<br /><br />BTW are you referring to what Feser writes in TLS or his PHILOSOPHY OF MIND? <br /><br />Cheers.BenYachovhttp://www.catholic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-85723640588222025352010-09-21T14:08:06.023-07:002010-09-21T14:08:06.023-07:00Incidentally, Dretske is an amazing philosopher. H...Incidentally, Dretske is an amazing philosopher. He is sensitive to empirical details from neuroscience and psychology, is incredibly creative. He, by my estimate, has done more than any philosopher (including the Churchlands) to create a bridge from the neuroscience of basic sensory processing (as you'd find in a worm) and thinking proper. <br /><br />Dave's suggestion that Dretske could avoid "weird contortions" by being more like Descartes is just out of left field in many ways (for one, Dretske is a very clear writer). Dretske's book 'Knowledge and the Flow of Information' is amazing (though ignore the first part on information theory).<br /><br />I found Feser's criticisms not very compelling. For instance, in response to his first criticism we'd say the internal state has a stable meaning over time because it indicates the same object over time, and these 'internal maps by means of which we steer' are, for Dretske, the basis of beliefs. That's a substantive theoretical hypothesis about how behavior is governed by information-bearing states.<br /><br />While someone <i>could</i> pull the disjunctive move Feser suggests, there is no reason to favor that because, as Feser eventually notes, there is a stable referent (the tree) over time and that is precisely what explains the role of the state in the organism's behavior. Feser then talks some weirdness about Dretske's view of matter, and Scholasticism, which makes no sense to me.<br /><br />His second criticism is sort of a red herring, a definitional thing. While Feser is free to say a thermometer doesn't 'indicate' or function as a 'natural sign' of temperature, how is that a substantive criticism? Whatever you call it, it is the basis for an organism's successful interaction with its environment: i.e., the fact that our sensory states carry a great deal of information about the environment, and it is by means of such information that we are able to successfully navigate the world.<br /><br />I frankly have no clue what he means when he says that an Aristotelian view would help Dretske out of this problem as well. Dretske has some problems, but it seems Feser's aren't all that deadly.<br /><br />In Feser's language: the fact that state R indicates the presence of a tree <i>sustains</i> the causal relation between state R and the behavior of the organism (this is how Dretske escapes epiphenomenalism, in fact!).Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-36460792660061619572010-09-21T10:47:40.294-07:002010-09-21T10:47:40.294-07:00>> A modern Atheist might see a secular demo...>> A modern Atheist might see a secular democracy as an "Atheist" State<br /><br />BY,<br /><br />Well, I wasn't thinking along those lines, so thanks for pointing that out. I might call a secular democracy an "agnostic" state, but whatever you call it, it's certainly not what I had in mind.Melmoth the Wandererhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15130512701199083736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-61670603484542808952010-09-21T09:16:45.617-07:002010-09-21T09:16:45.617-07:00OK Let's look at the offending quote....(p 92 ...OK Let's look at the offending quote....(p 92 of his book, talking about accidentally versus essentially ordered causal chains):<br /><i>Considered as a “causer” of sons, each member of the series is in this sense independent of the previous members. Hence this series is “accidentally ordered” in the sense that it is not essential to the continuation of the series that any earlier member of it remain in existence.</i><br /><br />That makes sense: if the father dies, the son doesn't die. He doesn't <i>sustain</i> the son's existence. He then goes on with another example:<br /><br /><i>And in the same way, the potter’s curving his hand in making the pot occurs even though the girlfriend’s request [for a pot] happened a week ago. The causal link between the request and the hand’s curving is also “accidental” insofar as the latter exists in the absence of the former.</i><br /><br />Makes sense, no?<br /><br />He then carries us to essential ordering:<br /><i>But it [the hand movement] would not exist in the absence of the firing of the motor neurons. Here we have an “essentially ordered” causal series, and we have one precisely because the cause in this case is (unlike the girlfriend’s request) simultaneous with the effect. The hand is held in the position it is in only because the motor neurons are firing in such-and-such a way; take away the neural activity, and the hand goes limp.</i><br /><br />So this is also fairly clear (ignoring details for now). Unlike the case of father-son, in the case of motoneuron-hand movement if you take out the first element, the second ceases to exist. Cut the nerves to the hand, and the hand stops moving.<br /><br />This is also reasonable. The problem Dave has is with the word 'simultaneous'. Dave's criticism was:<br /><i>For example, on page 92, in justifying the concept of an “essentially ordered” causal series, he claims that “the firing of the motor neurons” is “simultaneous” with the effect, “the hand’s curving.” He goes at great length to explain that he really means literally simultaneous, not just a fairly short delay: this is essential to the distinction he is making.</i><br /><br />I have to get back to work so may not post until later tonight, but I thought I would lay out all the details so people could see what's going on in more detail.Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-11498621668408876132010-09-21T08:23:50.773-07:002010-09-21T08:23:50.773-07:00@BDK
>Note I do think Feser's writing invit...@BDK<br />>Note I do think Feser's writing invites a misreading to some degree.<br /><br />I reply: That I wouldn't disagree with at all(I might even agree with it). It's quite reasonable. More reasonable than an irrational and slanderous blanket accusation that Feser misrepresents science.<br /><br />@Warren<br /><br />Ok, but I should note to be fair to Atheists. A modern Atheist might see a secular democracy as an "Atheist" State in that said SD has no official religion & thus "no god-belief". They are morally different from Stalin or Mao with their state enforced non-belief & suppression of religion.<br /><br />We need to keep these distinctions in mind.<br /><br />(Mind you that doesn't mean I am oblivious to the soft tyranny of Political Correctness in Canada or Euro SD's but that still cannot be compared to Stalin).<br /><br />Cheers two you both.BenYachovhttp://www.catholic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-13212526186345318542010-09-21T08:13:14.273-07:002010-09-21T08:13:14.273-07:00BY,
Just a reference to the historically undeniab...BY,<br /><br />Just a reference to the historically undeniable connection between atheist regimes and genocide. The comment was not meant to tar any individual atheist. Sorry if it gave the wrong impression.<br /><br />Although I would ask you how long you think you or I would last if someone like "Dave" actually had any power?Melmoth the Wandererhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15130512701199083736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-29112411129781974182010-09-21T07:57:15.054-07:002010-09-21T07:57:15.054-07:00Note I do think Feser's writing invites a misr...Note I do think Feser's writing invites a misreading to some degree. <br /><br />It would be useful Dave if you provided the full quote you believe is sufficient to support your view, and we could all analyze it.Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-24473729005392034132010-09-21T07:38:17.341-07:002010-09-21T07:38:17.341-07:00That's a cheap shot against Atheists Warren un...That's a cheap shot against Atheists Warren unless you mean it as satire against Dave's unreasonable behavior.<br /><br />If you mean it as a hasty generalization against all Atheists or mere secular societies that is kind of unfair. We Christians should strive to be fair least we give scandal.BenYachovhttp://www.catholic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-64863981270103736102010-09-21T06:42:33.501-07:002010-09-21T06:42:33.501-07:00Sorry Dr Miller I guess we are all differently dis...Sorry Dr Miller I guess we are all differently disposed to be sensitive about certain things. I did not mean to imply you were evil. <br /><br />>>The world would be better off without you.<br />>>Subhuman scum<br />Yes Warren it does remind me of term Untermenschen. <br />Being of some significant but externally unnoticeable African extraction this might be true in the eyes of some. As one of our African students said at school after seeing a photograph of my grandad, "your grandad was molato". It has never been an issue for me, but my mother and her siblings copped a bit of abuse at school. I remember Mum talking how Pop left the lodge after some abuse. The impression was It was todo with comments about him being less then human.<br />This is not an issue for me and I don't want to claim it as such. I never experienced ridicule. Becuase of my father and mum's mum, my genes are a majority British have dominated my complexion. But it does hurt because I think that Poppy was a decent man, irrespective of the colour of his skin. The same with my uncles and aunts on mum's side are ordinary and decent people.Jake Elwood XVInoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-1121636386963346332010-09-21T06:01:53.476-07:002010-09-21T06:01:53.476-07:00SockpuppetDave wrote:
>>The world would be b...SockpuppetDave wrote:<br />>>The world would be better off without you.<br />>>Subhuman scum.<br /><br />Untermenschen!<br /><br />We should all thank "Dave" for illustrating so clearly why atheistic regimes throughout the last century often practiced genocide. A teachable moment.Melmoth the Wandererhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15130512701199083736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-2103673600327509962010-09-21T05:52:15.918-07:002010-09-21T05:52:15.918-07:00Dave: You are a noob here. That you would say I se...Dave: You are a noob here. That you would say I selectively respond negatively to skeptics/atheists is evidence of this. You are completely unfamiliar with my posts here over the past five years. E.g., you might look <a href="http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2008/07/lewiss-famous-essay-on-bulverism.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.<br /><br />That said, if someone is being evasive, hypocritical, implementing multiple fallacies, etc, pushing silly arguments, then they deserve to be called out no matter where they fall in godspace. My standards don't change just because I agree with your conclusion, that would be pathetic.<br /><br />I follow the arguments. If there are no arguments, or the arguments are crap, that is something I'll point out no matter who you are. There are plenty of ignorant know-it-all skeptics <i>and</i> Christians. <br /><br />Not many at this site, though, people here tend to be pretty reasonable. Every now and then a person who doesn't know how to argue shows up, both of the Christian and skeptical variety (you obviously weren't here for Ilion).<br /><br />I read the specific passage in Feser's book, and read what Feser himself wrote in response to the accusations. He unfortunately used the term 'simultaneous' and that led you astray, but he clearly didn't mean to say that when a motoneuron starts firing, the muscle response happens at the same time. He extensively refuted this claim <a href="http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2009/07/beguiled-by-scientism.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. <br /><br />You should let that one claim go, you have misread him. I can admit when I misread someone (ahem).Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-18265006818895362682010-09-21T04:40:08.303-07:002010-09-21T04:40:08.303-07:00"With all due respect, you tend to write as i..."With all due respect, you tend to write as if you are very sure about things that you know very, very little about"<br /><br />Projection alert...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-79014926225204622992010-09-21T04:22:56.932-07:002010-09-21T04:22:56.932-07:00Peripatetic axiom - "Nothing is in the intell...Peripatetic axiom - "Nothing is in the intellect that was not first in the senses." (Latin: "Nihil est in intellectu quod non prius in sensu".)<br /><br />Thomism vs Empiricism? False dichotomy, much?awatkins909https://www.blogger.com/profile/04272494240109130737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-28095997556785664102010-09-21T03:11:33.514-07:002010-09-21T03:11:33.514-07:00Or perhaps you are thinking a bit more philosophic...Or perhaps you are thinking a bit more philosophically and think empiricism is incompatible with realism or rationalism? Perhaps something along these lines:<br />http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/<br /><br />I don't know Dave, I would love to read your thoughts on why you think Thomism incompatible with empiricism. <br /><br />Do you think Aristotelianism (you know, hylemorphic dualism being one of the characteristics of it) is incompatible with empiricism Dave? I hope not. If so, why Dave? <br /><br />I would love to read about your arguments and thoughts on these subjects.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-19485707019898769652010-09-21T02:56:36.451-07:002010-09-21T02:56:36.451-07:00An Aristotelian monist? Dave, I think he is an Ari...An Aristotelian monist? Dave, I think he is an Aristotelian-Thomistic hylemorphic dualist.<br /><br />Dave, could you perhaps make an argument why Thomism is incompatible with empiricism?<br /><br />Maybe you are thinking of "mechanism" or a mechanistic view of reality that is incompatible with Aristotelian-Thomism?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-25447333616483414402010-09-21T02:18:21.175-07:002010-09-21T02:18:21.175-07:00You know, Jake, although Anonymous bore false witn...You know, Jake, although Anonymous bore false witness towards me, you chose not to admonish it but me.<br /><br />That is what I am talking about in the double standard that Christians have exhibited for two millennia.<br /><br />I admit that I treated you wrongly: you were rude and inconsiderate to me when the evil person here was “Anonymous,” not me. And, yet, in my typical excess of kindness, I treated you politely.<br /><br />Obviously, a mistake, for Jake, you are more contemptible human scum even than Anonymous. I apologize for treating you like a human being – that was a mistake.<br /><br />I truly love the fact that people like you are Christians: it is thanks to people like you that the fraction of Christians in this society is finally declining at a good clip.<br /><br />The world would be better off without you.<br /><br />Subhuman scum.PhysicistDavehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11111405959451703182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-75492789839705965152010-09-21T02:11:45.728-07:002010-09-21T02:11:45.728-07:00When you guys figure out who PhysicistDave is the ...When you guys figure out who PhysicistDave is the sockpuppet of, man, you will have a laugh.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-9663413392545501522010-09-21T00:59:22.839-07:002010-09-21T00:59:22.839-07:00Dr Miller in regards to anonymous, while it was an...Dr Miller in regards to anonymous, while it was an uncharitable and incorrect reading of what you were saying I can’t see it as deceitful. However, the manner in which you go about protesting does nothing to further your cause or demosntrate an ability to appropriately socialise with others. <br /><br />Thanks for answering some of my questions I really do appreaciate it.Do your kids read your posts? Is this how you want people responding to you? Do you beleive you are being an appropriate model for your kids?<br /><br />You also write <br />We’ve had enough: the definition of a “New Atheist” is a guy or gal who has decided to go “Old Testament”: my slogan is “two eyes for an eye; two teeth for a tooth.” <br /><br />Well it’s a disturbing if that’s the definition of a New Atheist. I thought there were some inalienable human rights? Why is "two for one" justified? What about love and charity.<br /><br />Apart from thinking you Dr Miller are now just a song away from being a pantomime. There is just so much hyperbole from you that it makes me flinch a little when taking you seriously, from an Australian cultural perspective at least. I think your attitude and demeanour will be counterproductive. There will be agnostics or atheists you are taken aback by this approach. It certainly won't win hearts or minds/brains.<br /><br />JEXVI<br /><br />What was your thesis on? Are your kids secondary school or primary.Jake Elwood XVInoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-28801748265974391732010-09-20T22:50:01.662-07:002010-09-20T22:50:01.662-07:00>I have ruined several people’s professional ca...>I have ruined several people’s professional careers for less, and am extremely proud of having done so.<br /><br />I reply: That is just dysfunctional. You are supposed to be a man with a PhD. A learned, an accomplished man with a duty to contribute to the greater body of human knowledge. Yet you act like a two bit petty street thug.<br /><br />That is just shameful and waste of gifts.BenYachovhttp://www.catholic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-43086420720222389922010-09-20T22:29:04.186-07:002010-09-20T22:29:04.186-07:00This man has nothing of value to contribute here. ...This man has nothing of value to contribute here. Just verbal, abuse, hatred & mindless venom.<br /><br />Any discussion with him is futile.<br /><br />(BTW even BDK thinks he misread Feser.)<br /><br />Any rational being regardless of their beliefs should know better than to act this way.BenYachovhttp://www.catholic.comnoreply@blogger.com