Friday, November 24, 2017
Why the question?
Odd article in RCS by Halligan and Oakley.
Headline: What If Consciousness Doesn't Drive the Mind?
The article runs through a clear and valid description of awareness as currently understood. Internal narrative checked against sensory inputs. I wouldn't argue with any of it.
Who would? Who EVER thought that consciousness was in the driver's seat? Most religions give the dominant role to dreams or spiritual connections under various names. The 1st Commandment prohibits treating your own awareness as supreme. Freud certainly didn't think the conscious mind was the boss. Behaviorists like Skinner and Watson refused to acknowledge any sort of consciousness or will. The brain was just gears and levers.
Who are the authors arguing against? They don't say.
= = = = =
Later: A nice parallel in a BBC "science" feature.
Headline: Flies more germ-laden than previously thought
HUH? Who ever thought that flies were basically clean, or even less dirty than anything you can name?????
Everyone knows that houseflies are first-class disease vectors. This has been a firm and valid belief for at least 150 years. If the article was claiming less germ-laden than thought, it might be worth a headline.
Labels: Answered and unnecessarily asked
¶ 10:23 AM
