In a combox
remark on my recent post about James Ross’s argument for the
immateriality of thought, reader Red raises an important set of issues:
Given embodied cognition, aren't
these types of arguments from abstract concepts and Aristotelian metaphysics
hugely undermined? In their book Philosophy in the Flesh Lakoff and Johnson argue that abstract
concepts are largely metaphorical.
End
quote. In fact, none of this undermines
Ross’s argument at all, but I imagine other readers have had similar thoughts,
and it is worthwhile addressing how these considerations do relate to the
picture of the mind defended by Ross and by Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophers
generally.