Record in the Philosopher's Index

[leafofgrass]

This is the kind of stuff I'm talking about in relation to bad appropriations of Merleau-Ponty and the troubles of converting directly "continental sources to analytic philosophy

Comments

[madamebovary]

Where's Mikey when you need him eh?

ha!

[livingfossil]

If you wouldn't mind, could you explain that a bit? I mean, I am interested in the problem of consciousness, but I feel a bit lost here.

Respondeo

[leafofgrass]

Well, this is a reference to an article published in the International Journal of Philosophical Studies. What I found interesting in it is the desire to reconcile the languages of two of the main competing trends in philosophical thought: phenomenology and analytic philosophy of mind. As I discussed in an earlier post, I don't think there is a happy way to reconcile this language disparity because analytic-speak like to talk about "brain states" and "mental states" and "consciousness" in an unproblematic way. Phenomenolgists, on the other hand, of which Merleau-Ponty was one, don't realy worry about "logical possibility" and do not refer to a reified "subject" when they use the word "consciousnes." The fellow who wrote the article seemingly does not recognize that Merleau-Ponty wouldn't even have accepted "brain states" and "mental states" as valid categories, never mind have argued for the position that he (Priest) seems to be arguing for.

Helpful?

Re: Respondeo

[livingfossil]

Yeap. I thank you.