ontologicalme

  • Guest
Playing around Neurophysiological properties, volitional acts.
« on: November 27, 2013, 04:33:43 pm »
h:( purported )volitional act performed. (ex. raise hand to vote for board director).
n: volitional act related Neurophisiological properties.
b: volitional act related believe
R1 & R2: some type of causal relation or explanation. They might be the same type of relation.

1- h → (n & nR1h) & (b & bR2h)

2- ¬b

3- ¬ h

4- ¬b → ¬ h

1)If volitional act "h" is performed then there are certain neurophisiological properties "n", that stand in some causal relation to the  volitional act "h", and there is, a believe or set of believe "b", that stand in some causal relation to the  volitional act "h".

2) Not b

3) not h.

4) if not b then not h

* 4) contradicts scientific experience

1: is probably false
===========================

1- h → (n & nR1h) OR (b & bR2h)

2- h

3- ¬ n

4- b & bR2h

4 * contradicts a physicalist view of the world.


====================================

1- h → (n & nR1h) OR (b & bR2h)

2- h

3- ¬ b

4- n & nR1h

fits some physicalist view of the world

====================================

It seems reasonable to take that if
a Naturalist and physicalist view of the world is true.
Neither:

h → (n & nR1h) & (b & bR2h)

nor

h → (n & nR1h) OR (b & bR2h)

are true

But

h → (n & nR1h)

Seems to be, at least, plausible.