tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post7929258388460169749..comments2024-03-25T11:49:21.281-07:00Comments on The Splintered Mind: Introspective Infallibility, Causation, and ContainmentEric Schwitzgebelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-2246321471397808572008-01-14T12:13:00.000-08:002008-01-14T12:13:00.000-08:00That would make a pretty good case. I don't say w...That would make a pretty good case. I don't say we're <I>never</I> accurate in our introspective judgments -- just that we're less accurate, overall, in our judgments about our stream of experience than in our judgments about the stream of outward events.Eric Schwitzgebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-51945211043438287452008-01-12T19:25:00.000-08:002008-01-12T19:25:00.000-08:00Couldn't one prove, however, that a photon of a ce...Couldn't one prove, however, that a photon of a certain wavelength which people in the English language agree to call "red" is or is not able to be detected by the eye of a particular person, and that that photon hitting the photo receptor results in a cascade of neural activity to and through the brain? And suppose that the detection of said photon were able to create the same neural pattern of firing in the brain each time. And when we asked people what they experienced, if they said "red" each time, isn't that then proof of an accurate experience of redness?Troy Camplinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16515578686042143845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-9720613826016281032008-01-10T11:33:00.000-08:002008-01-10T11:33:00.000-08:00Whoops, Josh Weisberg, sorry for the slow reply. ...Whoops, Josh Weisberg, sorry for the slow reply. Your comment got lost in the flood of comments on the dreaming posts!<BR/><BR/>I'm inclined to think the word "seem" is toxically ambiguous, in such arguments, between a phenomenal sense and an epistemic sense. You *can* be wrong about how things phenomenally seem, but a sentence like "It seems to me that Hillary will win the nomination" is a different sort of matter (not a claim about phenomenology) that has some epistemic complexity to it. Under certain conditions it may be infallible or (differently) not functioning primarily as a statement evaluable in terms of truth and falsity.<BR/><BR/>I have some more detailed remarks on this in section ix of my forthcoming essay <A HREF="http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~eschwitz/SchwitzAbs/Naive.htm" REL="nofollow">The Unreliability of Naive Introspection</A>, if you're interested.Eric Schwitzgebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-21542937185950290052008-01-05T13:06:00.000-08:002008-01-05T13:06:00.000-08:00Eric:I've always wondered what could justify conta...Eric:<BR/><BR/>I've always wondered what could justify containment, especially in the face of many plausible cases of introspective error.<BR/><BR/>But I wonder what your think of this sort of claim, often made by philosophers, and in the 2nd meditation as well:<BR/><BR/>"You can be wrong about the world, but you can't be wrong about how things *seem* to you." <BR/><BR/>Can you be wrong about how things seem to you, in your opinion? Is this just a restatement of the cases you've mentioned, or does the word "seem" add something?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-70766136645723272122007-12-24T09:28:00.000-08:002007-12-24T09:28:00.000-08:00Ah, how very truthy!;)Ah, how very truthy!<BR/><BR/>;)Eric Schwitzgebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-55270693866872839742007-12-22T10:56:00.000-08:002007-12-22T10:56:00.000-08:00Introspection, infallibility, inner ostention - th...Introspection, infallibility, inner ostention - this makes me think of Colbert's notion of truthiness: don't confuse me with the facts, I know what i know! Or, in his words:<BR/>'I don't trust books. They're all fact, no heart.'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com