mind as inner space
the ghost in the machine?
well no - on Spinoza's scheme
extension and mind -
as I read him
are attributes - of substance
not substance itself - or substances in themselves
perceived essences - is also how he puts it
expressions is how I have come to think of it
expressions - that is of - substance
and this substance - in my view - is unknown
unknown - in itself
we can understand its manifestations
extension - and mind
but beyond this there is no penetration
except in a logical sense
so
on such an interpretation -
mind is an internal representation of substance
the physical world - substance - seen from the outside
we might get away with arguing this as a metaphysics
of human beings
almost in a Kantian sense -
but how far can you take it?
can it sensibly be extended
to cover all of nature
perhaps God is not equivalent to nature
perhaps God is just an aspect of nature
(and nature just a expression of substance)
again
how far to extend mind?
I guess the question is - does every outside have
an inside?
i.e. - we might argue the human being is in this
sense two dimensional
but what of the rock
I would think not
and this makes room for what?
occassionalism
evolutionism
epiphenomenalism
either these options
or
parallelism?
and is this Spinoza's view?
parallelism -
my previous argument on this issue -
an attempt to save the day for a parallelism
was to put that mind - only knows itself as
mind
the point being we could argue that - yes mind
is everywhere - as a matter of logic
but it only identifies (knows) itself in particular
not universally
this is a way
