In the third in a new series of short, provoking books of original philosophy, acclaimed thinker Barry Dainton takes us through the nature of Self
When you think 'What am I?', what's actually doing the thinking? Is it a soul, or some other kind of mental entity separate from your body, or are 'you' just a collection of nerve-endings and narratives? In the third in a new series ...
In the third in a new series of short, provoking books of original philosophy, acclaimed thinker Barry Dainton takes us through the nature of Self
When you think 'What am I?', what's actually doing the thinking? Is it a soul, or some other kind of mental entity separate from your body, or are 'you' just a collection of nerve-endings and narratives? In the third in a new series of short, provoking books of original philosophy, acclaimed thinker Barry Dainton takes us through the nature of Self and its relation to the rest of reality. Starting his journey with Descartes' claim that we are non-physical beings (even if it seems otherwise), and Locke's view that a person is self-conscious matter (though not necessarily in human form), Dainton explores how today's rapid movement of people, and information affects our understanding of self. When technology re-configures our minds, will it remake us, or kill us? If teleportation becomes possible, would it be rational to use it? Could we achieve immortality by uploading ourselves into virtual worlds? Far-reaching and witty, Self is a spirited exploration of the idea that in a constantly-changing world, we and our bodies can go their separate ways.
自从我意识到self-identity的不同理论似乎只有语词上的区别,我就对这个领域失去兴趣了。作者自己的那个C-理论嘛,只要能自洽,本来我也可以接受的——但他简直驰名双标。先是诉诸思想实验泵出来的直觉反驳Parfit,但一到Johnston说直觉可以被文化背景随意塑造,他又反过来批判说直觉也可能不可靠了,你玩我呢。还有,我看他其实也没解释清楚sleeping souls和why C-contin...自从我意识到self-identity的不同理论似乎只有语词上的区别,我就对这个领域失去兴趣了。作者自己的那个C-理论嘛,只要能自洽,本来我也可以接受的——但他简直驰名双标。先是诉诸思想实验泵出来的直觉反驳Parfit,但一到Johnston说直觉可以被文化背景随意塑造,他又反过来批判说直觉也可能不可靠了,你玩我呢。还有,我看他其实也没解释清楚sleeping souls和why C-continuity is what fundamentally matters to us的问题。别的问题我不管,但这俩是你自己明明白白提出来的,你不解释清楚也太坑了吧。(展开)
The C-Continuity proposed by the author in this book is actually an upgraded (confusing) amalgam of the school of thoughts of Lockeism and Neo-Lockeism 🤤🤤
0 有用 家樂福的空調涼 2017-03-27 23:06:55
从mind-body problem到 self-identity,横跨了心灵哲学和形而上学,更侧重metaphysics这一边。consicous theory应对self-idenity很厉害,作者还把各路回应梳理了一遍,搞得原本持物理主义立场的我不那么坚定了。
0 有用 失望的奥利瓦🌈 2021-04-14 18:53:12
自从我意识到self-identity的不同理论似乎只有语词上的区别,我就对这个领域失去兴趣了。作者自己的那个C-理论嘛,只要能自洽,本来我也可以接受的——但他简直驰名双标。先是诉诸思想实验泵出来的直觉反驳Parfit,但一到Johnston说直觉可以被文化背景随意塑造,他又反过来批判说直觉也可能不可靠了,你玩我呢。还有,我看他其实也没解释清楚sleeping souls和why C-contin... 自从我意识到self-identity的不同理论似乎只有语词上的区别,我就对这个领域失去兴趣了。作者自己的那个C-理论嘛,只要能自洽,本来我也可以接受的——但他简直驰名双标。先是诉诸思想实验泵出来的直觉反驳Parfit,但一到Johnston说直觉可以被文化背景随意塑造,他又反过来批判说直觉也可能不可靠了,你玩我呢。还有,我看他其实也没解释清楚sleeping souls和why C-continuity is what fundamentally matters to us的问题。别的问题我不管,但这俩是你自己明明白白提出来的,你不解释清楚也太坑了吧。 (展开)
0 有用 pikapopan 2020-11-01 12:05:37
The C-Continuity proposed by the author in this book is actually an upgraded (confusing) amalgam of the school of thoughts of Lockeism and Neo-Lockeism 🤤🤤