Lexicon of Arguments

 

I 419
Animal/inner world/Radner: one does not have to concede experience to bees! "How is it for a bee to see ultraviolet?" Can be answered in three ways:
1. Use any description, taking an experience of the bees.
2. "If they have an experience ... it is like ...". No obligation to truth, instead conditional.
3. Bees have no experiences: that is, it is also not "like anything ...".
I 423
RadnerVsNagel: Nagel avoids the method to imagine, one lives the life of a bat.
>"What is it like to be a bat?", >Th. Nagel.
Nagel: I cannot imagine the life of the bat by adding or omitting anything to my experience ...
Radner: (ditto): Inner-world hetero-phenomenology cannot be undertaken from the viewpoint of the first person.
I 424
E.g. J. van Lawick Goodall: Description of disgusting food intake of carnivorous hyenas.
RadnerVsGoodall: it does not even come as far as Nagel: it simply imagines that it is mouthwatering for it.
I 425
E.g. O.and K. Heinroth: "A bird has no parent duties, but only joys of parenthood, and does only what is "fun" for it."
Radner pro: this conclusion is based only on considerations of how birds behave, not on any imagined takeover of the bird's role.
>Animals.