death of the mind.

AlphaOmega2004 OmegaZero2003 at yahoo.com
Mon Jul 12 10:35:52 EST 2004


"David Longley" <David at longley.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Crq7lhIf0B8AFwJO at longley.demon.co.uk...
> Ahh, I think I know the answer to that. What Chomsky and Pinker etc have
> to say just doesn't apply to behaviourists. Apparently, really
> "intelligent" folk (such as the above) naturally know better. In fact,
> they advise others not to argue with "behaviourists", as doing so tends
> to draw attention to them and encourages them to say unhelpful things at
> odds with common sense.

That behaviorists have no explanation for binocular rivalry (among hundereds
of other brain/mind phenomena) shows rad. behaviorists  are not only at odds
with common sense, but that their "science" to be bereft of explanatary
value.  PLease read all the papers at Chalmer's site to gain some knowledge
of these issue before spouting your nonsense again.  Thanks!





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list