It's a great pleasure for me to be the first line to have a chance to talk to the British society and.
And I hope this could be also part of a strengthening of the interface between the the type of dealing with each and the Americans.
I would like to go with you through these eight points and hope that I could give some profile of what
I think is an important aspect in each of which is a triangular relationship between consciousness,
language and nature. First point consciousness, language and features are fundamental topics,
and each has thought careful discussion that leads into the centre of his philosophy in
contemporary diversity in these areas of research are also hard to know significance.
After the linguistic turn of the dominance of the philosophy of language in recent decades, philosophy,
especially analytically oriented philosophy, rediscovered the mind and rediscovered consciousness.
The consciousness has arisen as a key topic in contemporary philosophy of mind today.
But for young triangulation of consciousness, language and nature, more precisely,
brain functions is the subject of intense and controversial discussions within philosophy that neuroscience is psychology,
linguistics and the cognitive sciences throughout the world.
People are working in that on research programmes in attempt to solve the riddle of consciousness.
That is the riddle that arises from this striking that physical physical organisms possess consciousness at my
physical or physiological and neuro biological evolutionary aspects thus play an especially important role.
Today, where people speak, for example, of the neurobiology of consciousness.
As for Churchlands does and others, or even of a new physics of consciousness, as Roger Penrose does, scattered throughout Nietzsche's writings,
we find numerous reflections upon the areas of blind language and nature, as well as on their internal connexions.
That's the crucial. Which it is past as numerous topics in connexion with consciousness regarding its genesis and scope,
as well as the various epistemic achievements of the conscious subject,
the ego in all of this nature appears as someone who also also wants to clearly demarcate the limits of consciousness and language,
as well as the dangers associated with hypothesise, zation of consciousness and language model.
But Nietzsche is not a reductive mission. Eliminate divination based.
He's not a reductive illumination because he does not advocate the thesis that
mental and conscious stays and processes are ultimately identical with neuro
physical states and processes which we sit used by our everyday psychology merely
erroneously interpret as independent mental states and conscious phenomena.
According to the alarming nativist conception, mental states do not exist anymore than famous slogans than ghosts and demons.
As Churchland puts it, and many other people do need year, by contrast,
is a real list about consciousness that night to deny the excess existence of consciousness
and mind and its role would indicate a failure to adequately take reality into account.
It hardly needs to be emphasised that's together with consciousness and mind, the role of language and understanding of nature.
Also occupy a place of special importance in each thought.
At the centre of contemporary philosophy, you know, I say some words about contemporary Mary Ravelli philosophy, too.
To mark the place where nature can come in with his reflections on philosophy of nature and the mind and consciousness at the centre of contemporary
philosophy of mind lies the question of the relationship between the mental
in particular conscious mental states and processes and the physical state.
And. With reference to the aforementioned riddle of consciousness, one can greatly simplifying formulate two theses that seem to form a dichotomy.
First, mental states and processes are states that processes of.
That is that these is often modernistic materialism,
physicalism of consciousness of mind and second dimensional mental states and processes cannot be reduced to a physical physical states.
And predeceases, says the thesis of a dualistic mentalism.
Both pieces, together with their different areas, is not discussed here.
However, it can be viewed as failures for the following reasons.
I gave some reasons to feel that dichotomy of that nature comes into the picture.
Contemporary Maximalism maintains that meanings of successfully applied science are determined by the psychological states of the sign uses.
Here I do some arguments developed by Putnam and Birch and other people.
This presupposes, however, that speakers can, by way of introspection,
gain a secure knowledge of their psychological states and more importantly, on the semantic features and by semantic features.
I understand meaning, reference, truth or satisfaction conditions.
These semantic features of the science they implore. Yet introspection very quickly reaches its limits.
The meanings of our signs are following Wittgenstein not conceivable as the results of inner mental states.
And we do not use a language in accordance with internally accessible and predetermined rules.
The strongest version of the materialist physicalism thesis is mental phenomena are physical phenomena.
That is, they are the states and processes described by neuroscientists, by neuroscientific Pratik.
This thesis can also run also runs into some significant difficulties.
We should recall three of them that have been raised in the discussions of this approach.
They are coming from one day. Just summarise all aspects of the discussion.
First, if two states of poor processes are identical, they also have to have identical qualities.
Yet with wild pain can be hard. A sensation of colour suits, they thought exquisite.
The neural states and processes that correlate to them are not at all to be quantified as charged.
Something an exclusively neurophysiologists looking into the brain of another person cannot observe thinking and wishing.
Only certain observational parameters can be measured in this manner.
For instance, the neural action potentials automatical resemble the brain.
The subjective and phenomenal predicate is sharp and the neural predicate firing.
Fibres are obviously not simply seminary's.
Thus, that is the desired fundamental assumption of identity is not fulfilled.
Second difficulty, the identity thesis overlooks.
In fact, overlooks the fact that in saying, for example, a famous example,
water is H2O2 and analogously the conscious phenomenon, X is the neurophysiological phenomenon.
Why the ease in that formulation is Mocca is of identity, but rather that of a theoretical identification, to use Putnam's expression.
We are well acquainted with that. If someone since your photo and then you said that it's me on the right side beside the corner,
and then if you make the mistake not to have it in mind, it's a question of theoretical identification.
But you put it identical then you. My goodness.
What happens to him that he gets such and such a thing that he could serve as the very, very crucial.
I think very crucial distinctions.
There are I assume there are implicit add ons such as viewed under is under a chemical aspect or considered under a neurophysiological aspect.
And in that direction, in the formulations are pretty, pretty, OK.
That's one. And that's the consequence and consequence.
One must abandon the claim that we can express what is essential about poled qualities of conscious and unconscious mental states and processes.
So we need from a Europe physiological perspective.
Third point, with regard to natural materials and things in the external world, desks, tables and so on.
It makes good sense to follow. Thomas Nagel. And so quickly and distinguishing between what appears to us to be such and such a thing and what
it is according to its objective way to be a crystal appears to us to be solid and homogeneous.
Physicists, however, say that it is a grid of atoms that largely consists of empty space.
But when it comes to conscious mental states and processes, however, we cannot make this distinction in these cases.
The qualitative phenomena and subjective state is its entire nature itself.
Plus, one cannot meaningfulness. One cannot meaningfully say that a desire is according to its subjective nature.
Nothing other than a certain state of the brain that a person merely perceives as a desire.
This is a nonsensical sentence.
If one wants to progress beyond these is of the dichotomy between mentalism and materialism physicalism, one must attempt.
That's the proposal. One must attempt to change the architecture of the conceptual framework itself.
Nietzsche's writings contain descriptions and arguments that are instructive with regard to the aspects sketched above.
We will reconstruct. I would like to respond to reconstruct and discuss some of them in the following sections.
Section two, what we need is a non dualistic viewpoint of eight, dualistic viewpoint and nature provides such a concept.
He presents this continuous spectrum of what exists and occurs from the most extreme limit of the inorganic through the organic up to mental states,
consciousness, self consciousness, cognitive and other mental activities and human action.
The organic thus appears as the developmental and continuous preparatory stage of consciousness.
Each his world is a world of such continual relationships.
Man is thus, quote, not just an individual, but rather the whole organic ensemble of one particular line that continues to live.
End quote. This disease can be read either from the sample, from from the standpoint of what has already been achieved,
develop mentally or from the beginning of such a development.
I'm just taking one of these perspectives. Looking back from the stage of development already attained, it means that the character of intelligent,
spiritual, mental and living activities can be found in various degrees of realisation in the organic and beyond.
That's according to Netsch of the organic world, always already presupposes and consists in, quote, continuous interpretation services.
And has always already presupposes Jenkins is an intelligent activities in the broad sense of this term.
Such as identifying, localising and perceiving, demarcating, classifying and estimating.
These are processes that, in the broad sense of the term, can be made applicable also to the processes.
Could be, you know, a Gatting. Well, that's that's tough. Faeces.
This you also preserves and that's that's a crucial point, this this view of a continuous spectrum.
Also preserve the possibility that they go the eye of consciousness and especially the cells of the human body.
I won't say a word later can influence organic processes that it can, for example,
influence the motor apparatus so that a particular intention or desire can be realised through corresponding movements of the body,
which seems to be a miracle that you do not presuppose that continuous spectrum in such cases.
Mental causation is obviously given mental causation.
Enormous debate about. Topic, contemporary philosophy of mind.
In this sense, he just thinks that it is necessary to, quote, retranslate man into nature and come to a natural lifespan.
But since the processes of the organic realm are intelligent and spirit of spiritual processes, in the broadest sense, this programme,
the teaching programme of naturalising and Dinga that distinguishes itself from both transcend the metaphysics
as well as biodiversity and really scientific natural foods and the efforts to block epistemological levels.
It is not simply the programme that I like very much in other respects.
It's not simply the programme of epistemology natural light, to use the famous expression Quine.
This involves a kind of naturalising beyond the dichotomy of transcendent metaphysics and reduction is physical.
That's a special kind of naturalisation. In connexion with the continual model, nature praises the, quote, precociously suspicion of lightness.
Lineman's had assumed there were free, conscious, intelligent activities, perceptions, what he called petite gossip's young.
Which could significantly affect what occurred in inorganic or organic and other life events without,
however, having to enter into an explicit consciousness on an example of such activity, would be,
for instance, the non conscious and non epistemic perception to use dread skewes expression or registering a visual stimuli,
which nevertheless significantly help to guarantee old orientation in the world.
For example, while crossing a very busy street.
Neches, provocative formulation, quote, To what end does consciousness exist at all when it is basically superfluous?
It's a question are two sides. And this is not just the thesis, it's superfluous.
That's that's that's not the case. Not at all. An important point,
because normally people always talk about consciousness and the limits of consciousness and language that's see that there is a very,
very important and positive role to it. So in the evolution,
to put it that way and the materialistic evolution never could afford such bizarre things and of thinking about freedom of of will,
as we have that wonderful discussion yesterday with is all the passion in it.
And so it's it's it's unbelievable that it can't have any road.
Within the evolutionary budget, some subdiscipline.
So it's just provocative formulation and does conscious ness exist at all when it is basically superfluous?
Leach's answer to this question, because this is the thesis that there is little that consciousness is,
quote, really just a net connecting one person to another.
That's an important and necessarily given role of consciousness.
And that is it is only this capacity that it has to develop.
But this capacity is very crucial. It's not just we can do something that we can be collected.
Put aside. Otherwise, we couldn't even mark that point.
If someone does neuro neurology today, it says desires my definition of this is just an invention or an illusion.
That's interesting. He when he's saying that they never accept that this is a sentence of delusion or
that it was his brain that started this sentence and he would always say it was me.
Open question what it's meant, like me and I. So third point in particular, particular process model or the first thing is the market.
Now I focus on another.
In my view, the important aspect, in order to develop a non dualistic conception of the connexion between the organic and the conscious,
the physical and the mental, it is of the utmost importance that one can.
That one not conceive the building blocks of nature and life as themes in the sense of material bodies occupying places in space and time,
but rather ask events or processes.
Transitioning from the thinking model to the event or process model is incredibly significant when it comes to addressing
the problem of consciousness and the relationship between the physical and the mentally conscious and unconscious.
Mental states and processes cannot be conceived within the thinking model and its paradigm of material bodies.
Each just conception of the world or nature capture is characterised by the figured of highly complex.
You all know that dynamic reciprocal effects of numerous living and intelligent organisations will force,
according to Nietzsche's new interpretation of reality.
These Processo brought processional organisations or force art to be qualified as will to power forces.
We do not need to go into the precise meaning of this characterisation.
You and matter. The transition from the think schema to an event or process keema is also reflected in the philosophy of language.
This is on the surface, just like that point of consciousness and language following the pioneering work of Hans,
racially biased but analytically oriented philosophers of language, particularly Donald Davidson,
have shown that the logical form of a large portion of the sentences of our natural language
cannot be construed without the assumption of wins or processes as genuine individuals.
This is true, for example, of sentences that refer to a temporal succession causality explanation or etch.
The transition to a process model has important consequences, not only with regard to the status and the role that thinking concept.
Think of a thing as the crucial notion in traditional metaphysics,
but also with regard to the meaning of any talk of such consequence over transition and consequences for such.
An important question is whether for each post, this one always has to presuppose the subject to enact it,
or whether to use one of nature's formulations. The processes, quote themselves, have been.
Since for leadership, only a limited portion of reality is present what to or represented in consciousness?
This question gains fundamental significance with respect to the relationship between the organic and the just the physical at the Met.
Consciousness and the ego or the subject of consciousness appear on the scene at the same time.
This ego manifests itself in the fact that I could imagine I could imagine the content of consciousness differently,
sort it differently and assess it differently without ceasing to be myself.
This is the appearance of the deal itself by appealing to the vent process model and by taking up the idea of subject less processes,
both the following assumptions can simultaneously be made comprehensible.
And that's an interesting point.
I think first that the Gore subject that appears within consciousness is already dependent on a network upset of abjectness processes.
And second, that the stated phenomenon of consciousness itself rests upon an antecedent geneology of nonconscious mental states.
From this point of view, one could succeed in explaining how the idea of consciousness, that consciousness,
the idea that consciousness has a subject, is compatible with the idea of subjectivist processes.
From here and from here, one can proceed to the famous question of nature and other people with Goodstein.
Are these. The question of whether one can replace, I think, with it thinks this suggestion, as we all know, stems from guilt established and buried,
who had a significant influence on Nietzsche's conception of the possibilities and limits of language.
For Nietzsche, it was it was, first of all, important. The first point for that one not simply quakes this new it with the old order.
But the further. But he further emphasises that, quote, There is already too much packed into the it seems even be it already contains,
quote, an interpretation of the process and does not belong to itself.
And here, an important point. The interpretative character of the operation comes into view alongside its processional character,
acknowledging these poor sexual and interpretative characteristics undermines the fundamental role of the conscious and self-conscious subject.
Suggested by the surface grammar of the indexical word by even on a linguistic level,
it is clear and we can find some of these things and each is not.
Which is very, very important in the discussions during the last days.
I have the impression to be of the importance of the novelettes into this subject.
Not really principle for discussions. At least some discussion.
So that's a very big issue. She worked to transcribe the translation of that.
That's an important.
So on the linguistic level, it is clear that process sentences, process sentences cannot be made dependent on a surface pragmatical subject.
We can see see this and impersonal phrases such as X occurred, took place, happened.
It is also manifest in sentences such as it rained, it thundered or it thought these sentences do not have to do with individuated,
something that rains, thunders and falls and water.
And we're asked that question. Is the subject, for example, of a cocktail party?
To ask who is the subject of the event is to miss the aforementioned fact that depends or processes themselves have been asked for,
except in the case of a party and a party can take place in different rooms in an apartment.
The ego as a subject presuppose that's a strange story of the ego has to do to divide
itself into different parts and choose to go in second for first of all and so on,
to do so that there are very characteristic, very characteristic features about the process,
actresses that cannot be fulfilled by the traditional conceptions of the ego.
Forceful, functional organisation. I would like to to emphasise and to emphasise another truism transition that from thing to the process,
while the transition from the classical model of the organism to that of organisation is a
fundamental significance for Nietzsche's understanding of the organic and the conscious.
Each conceived of the organism as an organisational structure the organism traditionally has.
And they are integrated from the middle of the organism. This is the classical model.
But this is not the organisational structures of competing conflicting forces of powers in their isolation.
So it's a very important transition from the organism model to the organisation.
And she conceives of the organism as an organisational structure in which consciousness,
awareness and all for the mental state and processes up to and including conscious thought,
are emergent characteristics which result from highly complex interactions of the systems components that guarantee the organisation's functionality.
Thus, one can say that the initial stage of awareness, explicit consciousness,
self-consciousness and ultimately conscious thought arise as the emergent effects of an interplay of multiple organisations of force,
the various organisations of wills to power.
Such a view manifests a certain proximity to an opinion widely held today in brain research and knew that research centre we have cooperation with.
Max Planck Institute in Brain Research and other.
So that in brain research, that consciousness and other mental processes, such as perceiving, imagining, thinking,
learning, remembering, do not occur in a special look sizeable localiser place or SD card claimed through a special organ.
The famous pineal gland. It can brain research conscious as well as nonconscious mental states are rather conceived as results of
a highly complex organisation and dynamism of the entire complex is more precisely neural assembles.
This view can also be connected to this might be a little bit surprising, but the fragments of did not last were fatal.
A number of things that a lot of this.
Maybe this view can also be connected to the model of multiple draughts which has been developed within the philosophy of mind by Daniel Dennett.
DNA things. This model provides an alternative to the Cartesian conception of the consciousness.
She calls the myth of the Cartesian Theatre. Descartes a centralistic conception of the location of the seat of consciousness
and contended that the locus of conscious experience was great for him.
The pineal gland represented the centre of the brain as it where the inner station, the central station, through which in a sense,
perceptions must enter in order to be transformed into consciousness of the individual through a specific transaction.
The most important aspect of this concept is that the brain has a centre and that is
the causal point of departure for the emergence of the contents of consciousness.
This Cartesian view. A special centre in the brain that is constantly responsible for consciousness and its contents strongly and even imprisoned,
reflection on consciousness throughout the modern period, Dennett approving these sites.
William James wrote, quote, There is no cell or group of cells in the brain of such anatomical or functional pre-eminence as to appear
to be the keystone or centre of gravity of the old system and curved on the multiple draughts model.
By contrast, one understands that, quote, all varieties of perceptions.
Indeed, all variety.
Collinet mental activity are accomplished in the brain by parallel multitracked processes of interpretation and elaboration of sensory inputs.
And that's according to Dennet.
The information that enters into the nervous system is quote, under continuous edit editorial regulation under continuous.
Relations. I would say under the condition of being reinterpreted, continues.
But for our purposes, what is of central importance in the moment is the rejection of the idea that there is one and only one
central perspective or one perspective and one and only one in our centre of observation processing.
With regard to what enters into consciousness as content and what does not with regard to the organic.
It is important that the functional profi functional profile of the Food Network network of activities is thought off.
Indeed, it is dependent on the multifarious interactions of the parties.
Very crucial to think this is not possible that the organism in the organisation violates its cardinal,
but Nietzsche's conceptions of how the organisations and forces function.
This involves the idea that very important idea,
the dominant board governing governing forces that is predominantly organising forces are
also simultaneously dependent on the function of partial forces and their Constellation's.
Pressel repro sexual organisation is according to needs of the fundamental operation of everything that is real and alive.
Life for him. He once ruled in the US is to be defined as, quote, the permanent form of processes of forced fixations, i.e. void.
He says a deep divide. It's not determination because these are not deterministic processes.
But the question of power to fix relationships between these different centres of forces.
So life is, quote, a permanent form of processes of force, fixations, determinations, whether where that's important.
The various components grow on each.
And could these all the dynamic processes of organisations that continuously take place
within the internal structure of all organised beings and in all natural processes,
the central place that nature courts to the idea of functional organisation perform
suggest that his conception could be characterised as a version of functionalism.
I will not go into that. It's not the computer functionalism that Hillary Puttnam invented and criticised it more.
The functional organisation type of the will to power and the forces in their interrelations fist point lead to penetration of consciousness,
alternators consciousness procedes and by way of presentations, representations and meta representations.
And all three of these inturn are events that take place in and by virtue of science.
This is true of the entire spectrum from Phantom, a phenomenal awareness of sense, impressions and perceptions through imaging,
remembering conscious and reflexive thought up to self consciousness and plans of action.
Thinking is an event that takes place in science. And by virtue of science.
More precisely in linguistic science. We can, as nature put it, the right thing only in linguistic form.
And this is all. This is not only a negative sentence. It has both sides of the coin, positive and negative, critical.
The limits I we'll talk about later on when we can, as Nietzsche puts it, quote,
think only in linguistic forms and reseize thinking when we tend not to do it with.
In linguistic constraints, we can't us.
With this nature propounds the dependency, the dependence of conscious thinking on the grammatical functions of language.
Moreover, of every cognitive metall operation also necessarily occurs within the confines of grammar,
since linguistic signs only carry out their functions or possess their semantic properties only insofar as there is a practise of interpretation.
There is no sine function without an interpretation involved in it in children.
That's now become a very crucial one.
Here it becomes clear that there is an interpretative grand interpretative ground lurking behind the linguistic grammatical.
Each expresses this in an incisive formulation.
When you said said that rational thinking, quote is an interpretation according to a schema that we cannot discard.
But we do not have to. Now,
it is a fundamental significance that the internal connexion with language does intimate
connexion with language does not only appear at the level of conscious thought,
rather according to nature, it even holds true rock.
And regarding the genesis and articulation and the development of consciousness itself.
There is an internal connexion between consciousness and language or more broadly between consciousness and science.
If one accentuates the public character of language and sign usage,
that is the fact that a functioning language is internally bound to the public
practise of using linguistic and not linguistic science shared with others.
Then the public and social character of consciousness also becomes clear.
Language is a social. Art is the first sentence of points famous book word adoption, as we know each year also points out this component.
In this way, the accentuated the semiotic character of consciousness.
The eternal connexion between consciousness and language is extremely important in a number of respects.
By directing attention to the link between consciousness and language,
aspects of consciousness come into view which have a different ontological status from the components already discussed on the rubrics continuum,
emergent development process and functional organisation.
The use of language and signs are components that have the seed and the social, historical and cultural.
They cannot be reduced to organic and your biological processes.
This is a different type of. Ontology. If ontology is ever the right label to put it.
But I don't like my leg for the moment. This is particularly true of the higher order aspects of consciousness, such as self-consciousness.
The experience of one's own individuality and the self interpretations. For instance, often free acting agents.
I said yesterday, when we want to make sense of the notion of person in person.
And we kill these presuppositions of presupposing internally type of freedom that we can person of a person's.
Evolution can't afford such such things as denying completely freedom of will, because otherwise there would be no persons and acting agents.
So when it comes to such aspects, even the president, David Greene, recently acknowledge that they quote my quote from Balsinger at the bottom.
And Max Planck Institute in Frankfurt, very famous in his field, feel that, quote,
They seem to require explanations that transcend purely neuro biological reductions.
Remarkable science or someone working in a research institute of biology and brain research.
The decisive point is that consciousness and mind have now become ties.
And that's a very important point in Egypt have now becomes privatised at the intersection between developments
in the natural and organic sphere and in the sphere of the social these started and the Club for Growth.
I use a variation of that famous phrase of generate Putnam's meanings just ain't in the hat here.
We might say mind and perception of the mentality to Vickie's aren't just going to be.
They are. They have a public nature outside of the other person's.
Sort so different, but the logic of your logic, the status,
the occurrence and development of consciousness and the sense of awareness s consciousness and explicitly conscious thought arise according to nature.
Principally because of the need. Because of the necessity that individual human beings developed in relation to other human beings,
quote, to communicate, to make them selves quickly and precisely understood encode.
There is a need for communication, which for its part presupposes an ability to communicate.
The subtlety and strength of consciousness of a person stands in relation to the.
This ability to communicate to the, quote, nature of force and art of communication.
And this sense, Neches seises. Is that consciousness. But in general, it has developed only under the pressure of the need to communicate.
And consciousness is, quote, a connecting neck net linking persons to persons.
A task to carry out in. And thus it has to carry itself out in important point.
Communication science. In this sense, the development of consciousness and language.
By virtue of sitings and simple functions go hand in hand.
But it is not only the words and sentences of language that perform the function of building a bridge from person to person.
Non-linguistic signs do so as well as example of such non-linguistic signs.
Miccio refers to glances, gestures and touch the human being who uses signs.
But above all, invents signs is in this sense always quote the one who becomes ever more acutely conscious of himself.
And this operation. These operations are ipso facto connected with sociability for only as a social animal.
Did Map learn and become conscious of himself? He is still doing it as a need you to that remark, and he is doing it more and more to signs positive.
And the danger in this sense consciousness in its characteristic relation to other people,
obviously play an important role in the processes of stabilising social systems.
Sixth point, the relation of consciousness and violent.
Ego consciousness does not succeed in representing,
distancing or even suspending the network of its own conditions that caused the ground and
the condition network of consciousness do not arise within the space of consciousness itself.
And nothing in the states or of the objects that enter into consciousness or when he feels that they are dependent on that nonconscious,
a network of conditions. But there is a great danger that a certain little rabbit would sell.
But conscious and ego consciousness does have the possibility of opening itself up to the network of its own conditions as a possibility.
There's no guarantee that it will take. It has to open up to a network of its own conditions.
This opening can be viewed as the transition from the lesser reason, kind of funny.
Which one should principally understand more modern forms of self-consciousness and the Cartesian style, which aims at fundamentalistic,
self-assertive movements into the greater risk courses, which needs Mieczyslaw as residing in the human body and in bodily existence.
The philosophy of a body or of bodily existence begins not with biology begins where lesser reason reflects on upon itself and
opens itself up to the network of conditions that cannot be surveyed and entirely brought before once reflected in her body.
The point is that body the experiences enter into perceiving, thinking and acting as well,
since these are bodily embedded to describe the structure is.
That's an interesting thought. It's not biology, it's not single science teaches philosophy of the body or bodily existence.
Must not, however, be. That's a crucial point here to be mistaken for a form of naturalism.
Biologist and body organism ontology. It gives just for a little of the reasons for that.
First of all, the avenue to the body problem does not lead through a single discipline.
For instance, biology or neurophysiology, but rather unfolds in the course of reflection upon.
Their bodily existence is conceived as a precognitive dimension of the possibility of knowledge,
precognitive condition, the possibility of knowledge, as well as of biology or neurophysiology.
Second, when doing philosophy, one cannot simply ask the different to doing science by doing philosophy,
one cannot simply ask what the relationship is between the neural and the cognitive or the mental, rather.
One was always ask, how should we?
That's the crucial thing. How should we think about the fact that such relations are reciprocal in philosophy?
We do not neurosciences. We do not open our brains and look what happens.
But we ask, what are the sense, logical presuppositions?
If someone does sciences, for instance, your science is and comes up with big sentences about how it works and what's the impact of.
And the third little point, the body or bodily existence. It's hard to find an English phrase like this kind.
In Germany, the difference between Calpol as organism and life,
and I think that is very crucial at that point in English, is I think it's hard to to make that distinction.
I use the expression body in the experience or bought into existence.
People try to translate by this expression also with all sorts of language.
Sometimes a living body. So at that visit, there is a translation problem, which is in itself philosophically very interesting.
So the body or bodily experience does not Nietzsche's conception consist of building blocks that can be analysed by special science?
It does not consist of something. Some just think of something at all, but rather, as was mentioned before,
can be seen every highly complex and dynamic interplay of multifarious small
intelligence processes which become manifest as soon as we have bodily experience.
And if we just add a little point that on particularly interested in not just say one or two sentences to that,
when we ask what is the relation between bodily existence and, for instance, the meaning of language, words and thoughts?
The question is not. We have a lot of literature today and a body is that other thing.
The question is not whether they are inside our body is some special organ delivery, the heart, the circulation of blood.
That is the causal point of departure. Just for the meaning, for fixing the meaning at the level of of words.
But it's different phenomena. Logically, it's not a question of science.
Natural science, but a phenomenological analysis of bodily experiences.
Enters into and helps fixing the meaning of words.
And you all have had this experience. And sometimes words are coming easy corrections.
And in other situations, they do not. This is an interesting point as to the relation between bonding experience and fixing the meaning and coming up.
So the meaning, what jumbling the philosopher 50 years ago called and Chicago the feld's meaning is something very interesting.
The felt meeting is not just the causal point from one more again within the body, but body of experience as a shape of its course.
It's difficult, but I dropped say the transition from the ego consciousness to the human body is also the means to open up.
There's also the transition from achieving subjectivity, individuality, chief, the subjectivity that does and has always a job to do.
It's hard to be a subject.
And it's a tradition that pretends to individuality in the sense of that body, the organisation which every one of us is individual as a body.
Bodily existence. I am a living individuality.
This allows room for the distinction between the ego of the rational subject and the self, which s body is still famous.
Formulation of leeches, the master of the ego.
According to nature, the critique of the concept of a rational by prefabricated subject by no means demands.
The disappearance of the individuality of persons.
Quite the. Individuality is manifested in a non reductive sense in the organisation of the body or bodily existence, which everyone is.
As the interpreting being she is. Point seven.
The power of language and signs is great and extensive grammar and concepts occupy a particular place.
Of Grammar has a brief formative effect both on the house and on the what of the conscious thought.
And the matter has its limits in the form. What can be thought and said at all has to have been prepared in the grammar of a language.
Each, each. That's according to nature. It hardly seems possible to overcome the fundamental errors of reason.
Petrified in language such as assumption of the subject, object, substance,
unity, identity, duration, calls, thing purpose being by reasoning in language.
That's the crucial moment.
In other words, reasoning in language does not seem able to avoid all these prejudices which metaphysics, which for nature is essentially language.
Metaphysics relies. So metaphysics has a wonderful advocate, Nietzsche once said.
That is every word we express as well.
And every action, too, is an advocate of metaphysics.
In that sense, because we bump into that what can be thought and said, it all has to already have to be prepared in the grammar of.
The limits of language have to be pure. Again, you have the words in sentences.
Every word has a character of general generality. First expressions, for example.
This spot of colour. Are fundamentally incapable of completely grasping and representing the individual character.
Exactly. This unique, unique and distinctive spot of colour on the wall or on the desk right in front of it.
Conversely, an expression such as Tower of Pisa can apply to many objects beside the slanted tower in the Italian city of Pisa.
This character of generality is in the limit at all. Nor can it be avoided.
It very important that one cannot because we think PISA.
And then we try to add that city in Italy inauthentic and that's the tower and so on.
So what we try to.
John Ross big position is that we try to add many as many adjectives and adverbial modifications as the interesting thing is the more you add,
the more. Far away from the Tower of Pisa.
So on account of the general character of all words, every word together, every word he used for greater position,
nevertheless leaves the possibility open that many objects could legitimately be counted as satisfaction,
object of the expression, and even in the descriptive sequence of whatever length the in image evoked,
individuality of the respective thing would never be articulated.
When it comes to consciousness, it was about the language at the generality character when it comes to consciousness as well,
which of course continues to criticise the aspect that everything that enters into
consciousness is translated into it and thus as the character of generality.
Without that general, he would not even have. Sense of that individuality. So this is a double crux it with respect to human beings.
Consciousness appears to only to constitute a small portion of what humans are and ultimately turns out to be something superficial,
something that rests on the broader and more multifarious world of the organic.
And which came into being in the emerging developmental determinate way.
In this sense, quote, The world of which we can become conscious is merely a surface and important addition sign.
So surfers and assignable, I know your vision of an exciting.
A world turned into generalities and there are debates.
But without having debates, did not even have an idea of that wonderful speech that was in German.
Nature says that the reality is of humans safely under the outcompetes.
That means we have no predicates to grasp the way it is.
Complicated is separate from the grasping forces of a Pratik as in every language and ever thought.
But we can't say no more about that.
And saying that depends on the grammar of language used to make the relevant point presupposes not just language besides.
So why come to that last point, that is what interests me personally and I'm why did some work on that?
Reminded of it and the sighted interpretation of things just a little what I want, which is not the subject here directly.
But a philosophy of science and interpretations as the basis of an integrity philosophy of wild language in nature.
So I say just some some words about. Consciousness and language can be viewed and treated as taking place in signs and interpretation.
By virtue of that, not only instrumentally, by means, but by virtue.
This refers to the genesis of the function of consciousness and language, the use and understanding of symbolising signs is the most original.
I think the fundamental characteristic of the human mind for Netsch, a man, is characterised as the being that invents signs.
Station Offendum Danby's inventing, symbolising finds makes human beings unique.
I would add. Inventing, symbolising science makes human beings unique.
Different from clans and crystals. And also a number of animals.
Mental, spiritual and cognitive processes occur as processes of signs and interpretation.
That's the basic idea. We'd like to promote at that point. And this is my gift to a distinction.
This is not, however, a simple endorsement of the idea that characterises computational psychology and cognitive science today,
namely that conscious mental and cognitive activities consist in nothing other than the operative manipulation of given its symbols.
That's the definition of a large part of cognitive science,
which computational psychologists pretend are each supplied with identifiable and exact meanings.
That's interesting. If if I'm right, the thesis that the processes of science and interpretation are basic and fundamental,
everyone well working in cognitive science with that difficulty,
manipulating symbols and presupposing the exact meanings and interpretation of rules
presupposes always already the theory of symbols and signs and interpretations.
So it's dependent on that. Cognitive science is a secondary intellectual activity at this.
That's a very interesting point. So I go behind the back of the cognitive science with that idea of a philosophy of.
Science and interpretation and the second point.
Nor does it assert a merely external dependence of the mind and consciousness of science and interpretations.
For instance, in so far as thinking requires media and instrumental science in order to be able to be present and communicate itself and its contents,
not extol the relation between science and interpretations and consciousness and mind and language.
Conception of life is an internal one.
So until one that can be spelled out by different different forms and functions of science and interpretations along longer life.
How do symbols and interpretations function?
One needs not just these external dependents, but one needs to take one further step and an essential step for precisely these processes.
That is, for instance, of demarcating,
fixing and limiting meetings and contents of communicating contents between people standing in relationship of communications.
All these processes take place in and as processes of science and interpretation, as we have already heard.
Each emphasises one stops sinking all together, thinking in the know and in the broad sense,
the narrow sense is linguist using linguistics like the broad sense.
I make a distinction between narrow and broad sense of thinking, narrow and broad sense of science, narrow in broad sense of interpretation.
The broad sense of thinking is that the. Just the pre conscious type of awareness that we have, unsensational cognitively relevant sensations.
So if you look at that,
we can say this is not something that can be governed by rules of language and that there are at the grammar judgement language,
but it nevertheless rests within the functioning of science and interpretation processes.
So Nietzsche's conception, of course, was that of pragmatists at this point, above all,
with the position of child and approves, quote, We have no power of thinking without signs.
First emphasises. And he goes even a step further and writes them wonderful sentence.
I think, quote when he said, the first is we have no power of thinking without the signs.
And I would add two tourists. It's not the personality.
This takes place and is relevant in the narrow sense of science and thinking and in the process I sketch, then it becomes compatible with each other.
And then Bruce adds, quote, When we think that we ourselves, as we are at that moment.
Appeal as we song. And in hell did you find that wonderful centres and stations into your daughter's schools.
Yet that's it's a very deep level. Just do it.
You mentioned where we can put the sign and interpretation of stuff that is as someone is intrinsically predatory.
That depends on an underlying issue in this sentence.
It is crucial that consciousness, mind any thought,
are themselves internally and necessarily internally necessarily semiotic an interpretative process
that signs and interpretation organise and provide the basis for blind language in nature.
The dependence of consciousness, mind, thought and nature on science and interpretation is not an instrumental one.
It is not the case that we attain consciousness and so on by means of science and interpretation.
Rather, consciousness, mind, thought and nature constitute totally dependent.
Sign language functions. Semiotic an interpretative processes that are, by virtue of which we attain consciousness has a.
This you can serve as a guide, and I tried to spell it out a little bit in the text that I haven't mentioned as a guide for an interpretative,
pragmatic philosophy of mind, language and nature, which transcends.
So with that, I come back to the starting point, which transcends the dichotomy between materialism, physicalism and mentalism.
And I've tried to spell it out. Apparently not bothered with these things.
Thank you very much.