Category error revisited
Being engaged in the serious endeavor of explaining the brain, I
cannot allow a sophistic phrase to interfere. It is very clear in
my mind what I mean by subjective and objective. When I speak of
neurons in the brain I speak of the objective. When I speak of
inserting an electrode in a rat's brain I speak of the objective.
But I also have a subjective view of my brain, why should I ignore
it? When my stomach is empty, neurons are activated that I
experience as hunger. Why should I not use the shorthand of
speaking of hunger for this activity? If the philosopher is upset,
that is HIS problem. I am not explaining the brain for him.
The emotions (depression, shame, disgust, terror, hatred, rage,
surprise, excitement, ecstacy, passion, joy, desire) are the
subject experience of certain activated neurons. I will use these
words as shorthand for the activation of those neurons.
In the same way I will refer to axonal pulses using 'signal
energy', 'information', 'motor program' as I find these words
useful. A certain multi-channeled sequence of pulses I will refer
to as a 'motor program' when appropriate.
I will not be inhibited by some word merchant saying, "Category
error". I will trust in the maturity of my auditors as I switch
from the objective to the subjective.
ray
--
email: rscanlon at wsg.net
If you are interested in how the brain works, visit
http://www.wsg.net/~rscanlon/brain.html
