Phil1November 28

Phil1November 28 - November 28, 2007 1) Jackson's reply to...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
November 28, 2007 1) Jackson’s reply to Churchland a. The type of knowledge Mary has is irrelevant. What she has knowledge of is the issue b. It isn’t simply the same facts known in different ways as Churchland suggests c. Nagel’s point: Facts about qualia are accessible about only from the first person perspective d. So Mary in the room couldn’t have known facts about qualia associated with seeing something that is red. 2) Daniel Dennett’s Objection a. There’s no reason a physicalist should ever accept premise 1 of KA (given the way Jackson sets up the Mary story) b. It’s consistent with physicalism that knowledge of some physical facts requires some first hand experience (scientific practice assumes this) c. Physicalists should therefore reject premise 1-Mary in the room lacks some needed first hand experience to know all the physical facts about color experiences. 3) Jackson’s reply to Dennet a. Every physical fact is an objective fact. No qualia fact is an objective fact. So, no
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 2

Phil1November 28 - November 28, 2007 1) Jackson's reply to...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online