Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Durnavich
I am trying to illustrate the differences between representational and non-representational philosophy and to list some examples of why proponents of the latter find the former unsatisfactory. If neither side produces anything resembling a useful explanation, then, well, that wouldn't be the first time that happened in philosophy.
|
It's just difficult to see
how non-representational models
could produce a useful explanation. They're stuck with "It just broke."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Durnavich
Edited to add: By the way, Ken, Grant's response, which is a fair one from the representational side, is what I had in mind with the "Hey, where are the vortexes?" Newton-era analogy. The representational side will always think that there is a hard problem of consciousness that non-representationalists are skirting.
|
Well, I'm not coming "from the representational side", and I don't really know anyone who does. But what I was pointing out is that your "non-representationalists" are not just skirting Chalmers' hard problem, but that they're skirting a lot of the easy problems, too.
Grant Hutchison