… it is no good for Wolff to complain that Nagel has failed to “trac[e], step by step, the neurological development of species that appear to be located somewhere along the continuum between consciousness and non-consciousness.” Nagel and other very prominent philosophers have developed arguments which purport to show that no amount of neurological evidence could by itself even in principle explain consciousness. These arguments are extremely well-known in academic philosophy; more to the present point, they are surely well known to Wolff. Wolff may disagree with the arguments, but insofar as he pretends that they don’t exist, it is he rather than Nagel who is guilty of “philosophical malpractice.”
Saturday, September 14, 2013
Distinguishing philosophy from science …
… Edward Feser: Man is Wolff to man. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)
No comments:
Post a Comment