Re: The question of race identity

Steve Hayes <hayesmstw@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 01:41:16 GMT, Haines Brown
> <brownh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>Steve Hayes <hayesmstw@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 15:15:59 GMT, Haines Brown
>>> <brownh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> No, I'm not uncomforable with the word "process" used to describe
> the social construction of reality.

Sorry, I don't get the problem you are having.

1. I offered a superficial definition of "process" that was a
succession of system states. Does not the word "construction" imply
exactly that? That is, the process might be something like: a)
stimulation of the optic nerve, b) the brain processing that data
to assign meaning to it such as color, c) the brain further
processes that information to associate it with other
knowledge. Evidently I'm not quite seeing your objection.

2. I offered an argument that everything is a process. So all mental
operations are processes to begin with, even before we go to
consider a particular mental process such as I described in (1).

It may be that you are experiencing a problem with my looking at
mental operations in naturalistic terms, but if so, you need to expand
your objection a bit so I know how to address it.

--

Haines Brown
KB1GRM
.