The alien hypothesis?

[John Doe]

Ahhhhhh....but here's the rub! The maechanistic view
does not deny that we function AS IF we were a
coherent, single "ego" or mind, and it certainly
doesn't deny that other mental processess besides
Almighty Language are crucial to basic
cognition....Barthes thinks a that all there IS is
Language! He is part of this "school" of thinkers who
have just decided, based on NO evidence, that Language
somehow magically not only constitutes ALL of "who"
you are, but essentially constitutes
"everything"....THAT'S a big difference....the famous
linguistic scientist Steven Pinker, who you would
think, given the nature of human vanity, has a vested
interest in making his field paramount, denies that
language is the only, or even necessarily the PRIME
generator of conciousness, let alone All of
Reality..once again, the Dogmatic Monolithic Nasty
Brutish and Long-winded Scientists seem to be more
qualifying and less Absolutist than their Humanities
neighbors....curiouser and curioser...; )

--- David Meury <dmeury at yahoo.com> wrote:

> John Doe wrote, sarcastically:
> 
> "...we all know the individual "I" is an illusion;
> another "sematic construct" ...
> 
>  * * * 
> 
> But isn't it from a materialistic, scientific
> perspective that the "I" becomes illusory?  How can
> a
> cause-and-effect based mechanism develop a choice
> making-capability that transcends the limitations of
> the mechanism?  Are consciousness and free-will,
> therefore, illusions, products of noise in the
> system
> -- or something else?  The "quantum variability at
> the
> sub-atomic level" argument for freedom seems rather
> feeble to me.
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________ 
> Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
> 
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> 



	
		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com