I’ve been thinking about this, after a conversation between @evantthompson, @keithfrankish and @distributedcog. The analogy to stage magic in some Buddhist Yogacara texts does recommend illusionism about consciousness as the right account. (Cf. Dennett 2016)
(1/3?)https://twitter.com/NeuroYogacara/status/1202032491529457665 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @bsod_nams @keithfrankish
The big difference is that, for Yogācāra, consciousness does have an intrinsic nature; it's the subject-object structure that's an illusion.
4 replies 0 retweets 14 likes -
Momentary experiences have the character of momentary experiences; but I’m unsure about the status of *consciousness*...that’s something we’ll need to argue about in person...
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
OK, leave out the word "consciousness." vijñapti (roughly, "mind") moments have an intrinsic nature. The question then becomes are they phenomenal or just informational? Either way, they have independent being and essence.
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Another person to get into this conversation is Bob Scharf.https://philpapers.org/rec/SHAIYP
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
And this is a great paper (TBH, all of his are), though it definitely reflects the conditions under which it was written (as all philosophy does)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @NeuroYogacara @evantthompson and
Also, Bill Waldron! (But this is getting very dude heavy! We’ll have to keep that in mind)
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
@BronwynFinnigan @CatPrueitt @constancekassor would all be good for this fest
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.