I smell you're not completely convinced about Dulaism. The beast should decide to devour you, regardless whether it is its brain or mind making the decision.
When I’m writing this post; when I’m trying to figure out how to put my long-winded thoughts into slightly shorter sentences; when I think up possible punch lines (and then decide to give up); when I choose between a number of openings (I’ve changed the beginning a few times, in the end deciding on a theme supplied by a young guy sitting next to me who's just announced: ‘Problem Solved’) –
– do I make a specific decision and write a specific thing because a moment earlier something physical or chemical happened in my brain? Or something physical or chemical happens in my brain because a moment earlier I came up with a specific idea?
In short: is it who writes the post? or is it: what writes the post?
*or let me rephrase if you're a naturalist or materialist (and believe in emergentism fairies - who bring your consciousness in the dead of the night when you're fast asleep dreaming of eternity - and naturalism - **** it! - tales): have your synapses done an enlightening job here?
**This simple story – and I’m one of the believers: I have a gut feeling it did happen – always puts a smile on my face as bright as his explanations and sends a wave of another precious quale in my mind, the kind you get when you encounter a good punch(line): Doctor Angelicus was having a meal with King Louis IX and was dead silent. At some point, I can’t remember whether the anecdote specifies during which course, the Philosopher# banged his fist on the table, raised the King off his seat and shouted: ‘I’ve got it!’ Then, replying to the King’s curious (they were friends and the monarch probably took no – or little – offence) look, added: ‘The answer to the Manicheans.’
#Thomas, not Aristotle. I just use a capital ‘P’, because one should when referring to him, shouldn’t one?
