(January 16, 2023 at 9:22 am)Angrboda Wrote: Let's just say that the part that seems to be a necessary element of catching the ball, subjective awareness of the location of the ball, is absent; yet the lack of an ostensibly necessary part, under the theory that such subjective things are causal -- which is what makes them necessary -- does not prevent the causal chain which results in the appropriate behavior of catching the ball. If catching a ball requires subjective experience, it apparently doesn't require that subjective experience. It's hard to argue, given that one can replace that aspect of the behavior, that one couldn't in theory do likewise with all other subjective aspects of the behavior, resulting in the same behavior but without conscious experience or the involvement of awareness. At the least, it's evidence towards that end.
That would certainly apply if a person catching a ball did so with no sensation or memory of the event. One could catch a ball without subjective awareness, certainly, but the act of catching the ball can’t be anything but a subjective experience: the movement of your arm, the feeling of the ball striking your hand, the weight and texture of the ball - all of these sensations and the subsequent memory of the event qualify it as a subjective experience.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
