I recently read a tweet from a distinguished and academically credentialed philosopher, asking what it would be like to be a thermometer. Specifically, do thermometers have favorite temperatures? Do they ever think about anything other than temperatures? etc.
The question was meant as a deliberately provocative way of opening a discussion of panpsychism, the idea that all matter is in some extended sense conscious.
But I gave our philosopher a rather smart-ass reply. I said that being a thermometer would be a lot like being a barometer.
If you can take the heat, you can take the pressure.
Thrown your shoe at the screen. It's your screen, not mine, (and not its own) and it almost certainly won't feel pain.
Does "in some extended sense" mean "not"? If so, then I'm a panpsychic. And why are you protecting the identity of this nut?
ReplyDeleteIn such a formulation "in some extended sense" means roughly (and Galen Strawson is a contemporary advocate of this -- you can look up his works on it for a better statement) that perception is a universal fact. Every atom perceives other atoms, and when an ionic bond is formed between two atoms that chemical fact is the same sort of fact as -- continuous with the fact of -- Newton's contemplation of an apple. I take this seriously, although the problems it raises are serious ones. The thermometer thing doesn't seem to address the point at all, which is why I fooled around with my philosopher in my responsive tweet.
ReplyDelete