hi wayne...
>Suffice it to say that ambiguities surrounding the identity of a given
thing
>(whether human self or automobile) will not prove a mind/body dualism nor
even
>ontological essentialism.
maybe, maybe not.... one never knows where the discussion will lead....
>Now, lets return to ethics.
actually, i think this discussion is very relative to ethics...
origionally, we were discussing the question of why we have obligations to
the natural world, if any... my contention was that we have obligations to
the natural world because we are one with the natural world, because it is
us.... when we do something positive or non-negative for the natrual world,
we are really doing it for ourselves... if that is not a sufficient reason,
then i don't know what is....
bryan
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne VanTassel <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wednesday, November 11, 1998 8:01 AM
Subject: Re: To be, or not to be (our bodies)
>Bryan Hyden wrote:
>
>> >My position is that we *are* our bodies. If you get a hand chopped off
you
>> a
>> >different person, by a factor of exacly one hand.
>>
>> ok steven, let me ask you this... are you your toenails? when you clip
>> them, do you become "less of a person" as it were? :) do you really
change?
>
>This is getting pretty far from a discussion of ethics and the environment,
so
>I'll be brief.
>
>The same observations Brian makes about a human could be made of a car. I
would
>argue that if you remove a door from a car it is the same car, minus a
door.
>Does that mean the car is the car door? No. Has it changed? Yes and no.
>
>At any rate, this discussion will rapidly lead into an ontological debate
on the
>existence of universals, etc. The mere mention of which topic curls my
>toenails. I have bad memories of an entire semester reading such thrilling
>medieval minds as Duns Scotus and Herman the German (Yes, that's his name!)
I'd
>rather wallow in some toxic waste than go through that again.
>
>Suffice it to say that ambiguities surrounding the identity of a given
thing
>(whether human self or automobile) will not prove a mind/body dualism nor
even
>ontological essentialism.
>
>Now, lets return to ethics.
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|