🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec21.171520.2152@psych.toronto.edu> christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
>No way of telling who's right? You've lost me. But even if there were no
>such way, that would hardly warrant you abolishing the topic. Maybe
>there are things we can't know (though I certainly wouldn't claim this
>for qualia. I'm perfectly satisfied they exist.)

We are basically arguing about different theories of truth.  You are using
a correspondence theory and I am using a coherence theory...  So you are
perfectly happy with things that are intrinsically unknowable, while I'm
not.  At any rate, if Searle is seriously arguing that consciousness
exists but is unknowable then that DOES warrant stopping work on his theory, 
since if it true then there's no point trying to study consciousness at all,
and if it's not then we shouldn't be using it!

Danny.

P.S. I am posting from a friend's account.
--
*************************************************
I ache for the touch of your lips, Dear,
But much more for the touch of your whips, Dear.
You can raise welts
Like nobody else,
As we dance to the Masochism Tango.
*************************************************