> md> The big question is: do you need to be thinking about something in
> md> order to say it? And do you need to be thinking about X in order to
> md> say that you are thinking about X? DYE Matt
>
> ha> It seems difficult to say something or say that I am thinking (or not
> ha> thinking) about something without actually thinking about it.. But
> ha> what about " every-day" conversation when we participate in a flow of
> ha> relatively unimportant information-sharing..: "I'm cold", "Pass the
> ha> butter,please.." etc. Is it possible to talk about something you are
> ha> not really thinking about in between this chatting? Herheim Aaste
>
> It is possible to get by in everyday life without worrying about the
> mind/body problem or the other-minds problem. Folk psychology will get
> you by, just as folk physics does. But when it comes to law-courts, or
> the court of scientific inquiry, you've got to do better than hearsay.
I'm a bit confused..Are we discussing the same thing? Maybe my
participation in this discussion should wait until I know a bit more
about cog.psy... It's a bit intimidating to try to comment upon
things with my ideas (although not that bright, maybe) when whatever
I have to say is picked to pieces on my lack of knowledge.
Are you trying to make us drop our "folk psychology" way of thinking?
Aaste Herheim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Feb 13 2001 - 16:23:38 GMT