Talk:Type physicalism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Philosophy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy and the history of ideas. Please read the instructions and standards for writing and maintaining philosophy articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
[edit] It was a typo
I rushed through a little carelessly and typed in five tokens. Sorry to mislead. Thanks for spotting the error. --Lacatosias 09:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
I think the reply to the final criticism is worded a little vaguely. I've read it several times through but I really don't understand what Smart's reply is supposed to say. I think it'd help if someone who knew the subject very well could reword it.
[edit] Fish
- "pain is identical to C-fiber firings" universally and at all times is highly implausible
Also known as "It's ok: fish don't feel pain". Or, perhaps "what the fish feels isn't pain".
-
- Not at all. What it means is simply that the same exact sensation of pain could be realized by, say, Q-fiber firings instead of C-fiber firings in the salmon, by J-fibre firings in the octopus and by some configuration of silicon in a hypothetical silicon-based life form (computer with qualia). --Lacatosias 13:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
How ironic that the originator of Type Theory was named "Boring."
