Aretha Franklin
Aretha Franklin: why we love America. Donald Trump: why we hate America. I’m aiming for 76 as my expiry date. Her lack of glamor is part of the reason for her transcendence. That voice.
The TV coverage was gratifying and RESPECT accorded a good deal of respect as a feminist anthem. Fair enough, it has a political dimension, but let’s not forget the groove and the way Aretha phrases it rhythmically.
Colin, where do you currently stand on Daniel Dennett’s, “User Illusion” view of consciousness? He otherwise refers to consciousness as a “bag of tricks”. But is there a “user illusion” for each member of that bag—bag of feelings, perceivings and understandings? Or is there some mode of apperception that enables the whole of our, ” Manifest Image” of the world? Questions of evolvabity supervene.
I don’t think about it: I find it utterly preposterous. But I do have an unpublished paper on why it’s impossible to believe you are conscious when you are not. I just posted it here.
If you find Dennett’s ,” User Illusion”, view of consciousness, “preposterous”, but yet “don’t think about it” than you have no rational ground for finding it preposterous. You then proceed to, “think about” why it’s preposterous (see your’e, “unpublished paper”on why, more or less, such as Dennett’s views are preposterous)—to no better effect than your not thinking about it. That said, Iv’e always found you a very superior expositor of “classic” 20th century analytic philosophy. Your clarity rivals that of Russell’s and of A.J. Ayer’s, “Language, Truth and Logic”. One might find the “substance” of your clarity congenial or not but it’s always a pleasure to read (and more often edifying than not). Too much of philosophy is just rhetorical bull-shit—see the beginning of this post.
I didn’t take my essay to be about Dennett specifically. I came to the view that his position and arguments are preposterous years ago, so I no longer think about them. Your strictures are misdirected.