Other Sites

Fame at Last

Well, sort of. I am apparently having a debate with Dr Tallis. I didn’t know that when I wrote the piece, but there you go – and Chambers have put it on our website. Feel free to comment. Now I really am going to Venice.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Fame at Last

  1. As a philosopher, I found some of Raymond Tallis’s discussion spot-on. It’s a conceptual confusion to identify oneself with one’s brain (it would be like saying my throat drinks or my retinas see). *People* see things and to identify people with their brains is a mistake. People’s minds aren’t substances (mental or physical); losing one’s mind isn’t like losing one’s wallet. Having a mind consists in possessing a bunch of capacities, capacities only attributable to whole living beings. (This isn’t to deny that they couldn’t have those capacities without having a brain.) M. R. Bennett (a neuroscientist) and P. M. S. Hacker have written a great book on this stuff, *Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience*; Ch. 3 deals with some of the fallacies neuroscientists make when discussing the mind, and it sounds like these neuro-lawyers are making the same ones.

    Apologies for waxing philosophical, but I think this is a clear case where shoddy philosophical thinking can have practical consequences. If these neuro-lawyers start convincing judges that their position is a good one, all sorts of bad consequences could follow.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s