Marsha Enright

Members
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Marsha Enright

  • Rank
    $
  • Birthday October 1

Contact Methods

  • MSN
    menright@rifinst.org
  • Website URL
    http://www.collegeunitedstates.org
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Chicago
  • Interests
    Aesthetics, Psychoepistemology, Neuropsychology, Developmental psychology, Movies, Plays and novels, racquetball

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Marsha Familaro Enright
  1. Addressing a joint session of Congress on health care, President Barack Obama reiterated his often-expressed aversion to the profit motive: “y avoiding some of the overhead that gets eaten up at private [health insurance] companies by profits and excessive costs and executive salaries, [the public insurance option] could provide a good deal for consumers, and would also keep pressure on private insurers to keep their policies affordable and treat their customers better . . .” Is this true? Is profit wasteful, as Obama implies? Does it lead to higher prices and lower value to consumers? Can the
  2. Michael, I enjoyed National Treasure too - I think it's a bit of a take off on DaVinci Code as well. Did anyone see V for Vendetta? (You guys have probably talked about this movie already). I thoroughly enjoyed it for its highly stylized, Romantic plot, characterization and theme. It has more subtly than at first glance, too. I disagree with those who argue it promotes anarchy. I don't think they followed the plot. One of my all time favorite sweet/funny movies is Bossa Nova (2000), by the Brazilian director Bruno Barreto, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0180837/. It's a romantic comedy, plo
  3. Hi Fran! Good to 'see' you again. Are you coming to Orange County this summer? If so, we must have some fun together again. I haven't seen Pleasantville in a long time, but remember enjoying it for its clever dramatization of its theme. I think it was one of the first things I saw Spiderman in (geez, I forget his name now!). Best, Marsha
  4. Dragonfly, We have no reason to think that subatomic particles have awareness or experience meaning; by direct experience, we have plenty of reason to think that our minds *do*. On top of our own, personal, individual direct experience, we have plenty of evidence that other humans have minds, because they can do so many things which no inanimate thing can do - in fact, which no other living being can do. (This latter is why we came up with the concept of volition, to explain that ability.) This means that our minds are a property of matter not existing in inanimate matter like air or asphal
  5. Dragonfly, I have to agree with LW - in thinking about the way 'intention' is used, especially in contradistinction to 'purpose' or 'aim' or 'goal', I think it is used to mean consciousness and choice in what is being aimed at. LW - I agree that it has a strong implication of choice, but I think we could talk about an animal's intention, too, so I wouldn't say that volition was necessarily a part of the meaning. Okay, I'm just waiting now for people to jump all over this, but I do think I see my dog choose between an orange and a hot dog offered to him, for example. He's just not fully voli
  6. Jody, Great point. I think science is the *systematic* observation of nature: yes, humans have observed nature and accommodated their actions in response to what they found since time immemorial (at least the ones paying attention!). However, we didn't have science until people like Aristotle discovered the principles by which to systematically observe and interact with nature to be able to discover consistent, accurate conclusions. And the Renaissance work on the principles of experimentation then really stoked the fire of discovery. Marsha
  7. Ellen, Well, I'm glad you broke down! Wouldn't you say that the program is the set of ideas symbolized by the written code which, which is embodied in the series of actions taken in electrical and mechanical work of the computer to follow the program? In that way, the program is immaterial but, of course, its physical embodiment is not. I sure as heck don't know what "information" is - it is a word that is used in so many ways, such as the ideas in books, a computer program or DNA code (in the latter, its not even referring to a set of ideas!) The word captures something important, but I can
  8. Dragonfly, While I agree with you that 1. living things are goal-directed and conscious living things have purpose and 2. man-made objects like thermostats have functions designed by humans to achieve human purposes, I don't think non-conscious things can have intentions. I think the word 'Intention' specifically means being aware of goals. Machines don't have awareness, so I don't think they have intentions, but their actions do fulfill goals set by their human designers. It is interesting to think about the difference in meaning between 'purpose' and 'intention' - they're used synonmousl
  9. Bob, Hey, nice to "see" you! And thanks for finding the passage in ITOE that's likely the start of this belief about the relationship between philosophy and science. I'm much more familiar with Rand's writings than anyone else's in the movement, so I had thought she had said this somewhere. I will take a look at what you've written on the issue. I see her mistake as not realizing that the findings of science can and do influence philosophy; she may be right that it can't be arcane, technical knowledge, but something an intelligent person can grasp. In other words, a set of facts and conclu
  10. Michael, Funny, after I made the comment on the skin tone, I looked back at the picture again and actually was shocked at how white she was...so unfortunately, I think you're right! (Sorry Bryan!) Actually, the first time I looked at the painting, I thought she was supposed to have those sheer white stockings on that are sometimes in style, but then I noticed her face was very pale also. Perhaps he has something he's trying to capture with that look, but I don't get it. I do give him a lot of credit, in all these pictures, for trying to capture some complex and sacred feelings. John says
  11. Charles, Great example of how science can affect ethics. I, personally, am fascinated with the problem of free will and biochemistry and their relationship. LOL! That's a wonderful observation. Marsha
  12. Jenna, I'm really sorry if anything I said appeared to be criticizing you and your study of neuroscience. I didn't mean to at all! I'm just interested in exploring the philosophy of science as it applies to consciousness and neuroscience. I applaud your study of brain functions and their relationship to consciousness and mind - it's one of my main areas of study and interest, too. I'm fascinated by what neuroscience has discovered about the relationship between brain and mind - and how that affects our conception of human nature (that was another agreement with Charles!) I look forward to
  13. Dominique is blonde - maybe that's confusing the issue. I realized one thing that bothers me about that picture is the skin tone - it's white almost ghostlike white. I wonder why he chose to make her look that way? She's not described as having really white skin especially. Marsha
  14. Whenever I look at a painting, I try to see it first 'on its own,' i.e. by putting aside anything I know about it outside of what I can see in the painting, and letting myself react to it as such. And, on this first pass, I try to see whether I find it visually pleasing or what, in a perceptual sense, like I would with decorative art. Also, I try to see how it makes me feel emotionally - is it exciting, calming, erotic, scary, full of dread, sad or inspiring. Then I go back to thinking about the painting in the context of what the painter called it and what I know about any extra-visual associ
  15. I should have previewed my previous post before putting it up!: "I have spent hours going through neuropsycho, psych, physiology - all kinds of book, looking for the authors' definition of consciousness. When they attempt any, it tends to be circular (which is a logical result of a concept being axiomatic). Also, I've noticed that no one gives a definition of 'information,' by the way, that's not circular. " I meant to add: I believe these authors end up using circular definitions because the concept is axiomatic and not defineable by other concepts. Best, Marsha