Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

> On 16 May 2019, at 14:18, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > > > On 5/16/2019 3:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 13 May 2019, at 20:48, Philip Thrift >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, May 13, 2019 at 1:23:22 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On 5/16/2019 3:00 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 May 2019, at 20:48, Philip Thrift > wrote: On Monday, May 13, 2019 at 1:23:22 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 11 May 2019, at 08:13, Philip Thrift > wrote:

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

> On 13 May 2019, at 15:27, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 7:21 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > > At least now you are saying "brain activity" instead of "mind". That's > > progress. > > I think you're talking about the "difference" between 6 and

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

> On 13 May 2019, at 20:48, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Monday, May 13, 2019 at 1:23:22 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 11 May 2019, at 08:13, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> https://aeon.co/ideas/how-the-dualism-of-descartes-ruined-our-mental-health >>

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On Monday, May 13, 2019 at 1:23:22 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 11 May 2019, at 08:13, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > https://aeon.co/ideas/how-the-dualism-of-descartes-ruined-our-mental-health >

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

> On 11 May 2019, at 08:13, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > https://aeon.co/ideas/how-the-dualism-of-descartes-ruined-our-mental-health > ... > Nature was thereby drained of her inner life, rendered a deaf and blind > apparatus of indifferent and value-free law, and humankind was faced with a

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

> On 11 May 2019, at 12:51, John Clark wrote: > > Separating mind from matter is no more ruinous than separating "fast" from > "racing car". Mind is what a brain does. We can be OK with this. But then with *digital* Mechanism, mind is what

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On Monday, May 13, 2019 at 8:27:38 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 7:21 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > > *At least now you are saying "brain activity" instead of "mind". That's >> progress.* >> > > I think you're talking about the "difference" between 6 and half a dozen.

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 7:21 PM Philip Thrift wrote: > *At least now you are saying "brain activity" instead of "mind". That's > progress.* > I think you're talking about the "difference" between 6 and half a dozen. Mind is what the brain does and you can't **do** anything without the activity

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 6:09:08 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 2:34 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > *> We talk about the sun and solar activities (like fusion, magnetic >> propagation, etc.) but we don't talk about solar activities distinct from >> the sun in any

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 2:34 PM Philip Thrift wrote: *> We talk about the sun and solar activities (like fusion, magnetic > propagation, etc.) but we don't talk about solar activities distinct from > the sun in any weird way,* You can't have solar activity without the sun, and there is nothing

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 10:20:46 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 10:10 AM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > >> > "Brain", "mind", "psyche" are nouns. [ Wiktionary ] >> > > And my third grade English teacher said "I" was a pronoun, she was > entirely wrong. "I" is an

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 10:10 AM Philip Thrift wrote: > > "Brain", "mind", "psyche" are nouns. [ Wiktionary ] > And my third grade English teacher said "I" was a pronoun, she was entirely wrong. "I" is an adjective describing how atoms behave when they are organized in a johnkclarkian way, *>

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 8:36:00 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 7:21 AM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > > *That's a start to get away from the Cartesian delusion.* > > > I agree it's silly to say mind has nothing to do with matter, but it's not > silly to say nouns are

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 7:21 AM Philip Thrift wrote: > *That's a start to get away from the Cartesian delusion.* I agree it's silly to say mind has nothing to do with matter, but it's not silly to say nouns are not the same as adjectives. Brain and mind do not mean the same thing. John K

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 5:52:29 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > Separating mind from matter is no more ruinous than separating "fast" > from "racing car". Mind is what a brain does. > > John K Clark > "Mind" is one of those wo

Re: How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

Separating mind from matter is no more ruinous than separating "fast" from "racing car". Mind is what a brain does. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group

How separating mind from matter ruined mental health

https://aeon.co/ideas/how-the-dualism-of-descartes-ruined-our-mental-health ... Nature was thereby drained of her inner life, rendered a deaf and blind apparatus of indifferent and value-free law, and humankind was faced with a world of inanimate, meaningless matter, upon which it projected

Re: Could the Higgs boson convert mind to matter ?

Massless particles are also physical. On 26 October 2013 03:13, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Leibniz gave some plausible arguments that space is not substantial, is just mathematical, but you have to be a platonist to accept that. Platonism suggests that there is a nonphysical

Re: Could the Higgs boson convert mind to matter ?

You don't have to be a Platonist to accept that space is not substantial. To me, space is attenuation of sensitivity. What looks like space to us is the result of our body's relation to other bodies of similar scale. Even if adding mass made something 'physical', there is nothing non-physical

Re: Materialists believe apparently strange things, such as that mind is matter.

On 22 Jun 2013, at 03:26, Roger Clough wrote: Materialists believe apparently strange things, such as that mind is matter. What if mind is matter ? Then mind would be quantized, and there would be particles of mind (psychon, as someone named it). Comp would be false, but some other

Re: Materialists believe apparently strange things, such as that mind is matter.

is matter. What if mind is matter ? Then mind would be quantized, and there would be particles of mind (psychon, as someone named it). Comp would be false, but some other mechanist assumption would remain correct. Just be sure your doctor put the right psychon in the artificial brain. I

Re: Materialists believe apparently strange things, such as that mind is matter.

:44 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 22 Jun 2013, at 03:26, Roger Clough wrote: Materialists believe apparently strange things, such as that mind is matter. What if mind is matter ? Then mind would be quantized, and there would be particles of mind (psychon, as someone

Re: What if mind is matter ?

What is mind? Never matter. What is matter? Never mind. -Homer Simpson -Original Message- From: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Jun 20, 2013 12:42 pm Subject: Re: What if mind is matter ? On 20 Jun 2013, at 17:42, Roger

Materialists believe apparently strange things, such as that mind is matter.

Materialists believe apparently strange things, such as that mind is matter. What if mind is matter ? If mind is matter, if thought is particular, can you explain then how such particles think ? Do they mull around until they vote one to be the leader, who organzies the rest of the unruly mob

RE: Materialists believe apparently strange things, such as that mind is matter.

--- Original Message --- From: Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net Sent: 22 June 2013 11:26 AM To: - Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net Subject: Materialists believe apparently strange things, such as that mind is matter. Materialists believe apparently strange things, such as that mind is matter

What if mind is matter ?

What if mind is matter ? If mind is matter, if thought is particular, can you explain then how such particles think ? Do they mull around until they vote one to be the leader, who organzies the rest of the unruly mob ? And what orders does he give them ? Etc. -- You received this message

Re: What if mind is matter ?

On 20 Jun 2013, at 17:42, Roger Clough wrote: What if mind is matter ? I don't think anyone in this list believe that mind is matter. Probably some might still think that mind is information transformations implemented in matter, but that's different. It does locally work, but in fine

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

On 19 May 2013, at 21:54, Johnathan Corgan wrote: On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Feel free to ask more from this post, though. If you understand the FPI, the rest follows from logic and some passive theoretical computer science, I think. Yes, I

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: More to the point of my original comment, though, you frequently make statements about how it follows from this an explanation of quantum, qualia, matter, etc., using references to modal logic, Plotinus' theory of

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

On 18 May 2013, at 23:32, Johnathan Corgan wrote: On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 3:37 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Matter is a first person plural sharable border by collections of machines which multiplied collectively on the set of all computations. It sure would nice if you

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Feel free to ask more from this post, though. If you understand the FPI, the rest follows from logic and some passive theoretical computer science, I think. Yes, I understand UDA 1-7 and the concept that first-person

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

On 17 May 2013, at 18:47, meekerdb wrote: On 5/17/2013 12:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: It would not be an epiphenomenon, unless you think the soul as no power of its own. Materialist cannot keep both matter and mind. Why not suppose they are just different aspects of the same thing

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 3:37 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Matter is a first person plural sharable border by collections of machines which multiplied collectively on the set of all computations. It sure would nice if you could unpack this sentence, word by word, to help make

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

evolutionary advantage. Cheers Telmo. On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:08 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: From an ancient Simpsons, from Homer to Bart: what is mind? Never matter. What is matter? Never mind. I will hold with Chalmers, on this one. That it is the hard problem. Perhaps like the pure

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

On 16 May 2013, at 23:08, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: From an ancient Simpsons, from Homer to Bart: what is mind? Never matter. What is matter? Never mind. I will hold with Chalmers, on this one. Chalmers does not seem aware of the hard problem of matter. He coined the expression hard

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

. Bruno On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:08 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: From an ancient Simpsons, from Homer to Bart: what is mind? Never matter. What is matter? Never mind. I will hold with Chalmers, on this one. That it is the hard problem. Perhaps like the pure materialists love to say

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

On 5/17/2013 12:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: It would not be an epiphenomenon, unless you think the soul as no power of its own. Materialist cannot keep both matter and mind. Why not suppose they are just different aspects of the same thing. Brent -- You received this message because you

The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter According to the Dao de jing, the solution to the mind-brain problem is that it is not a problem. Matter is mind, mind is matter is one way of saying it. Leibniz said the same, that monads are expressions of material bodies

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

This reminds me of Isaac Asimov's 1, 2, 3, infinity On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter According to the Dao de jing, the solution to the mind-brain problem is that it is not a problem

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

On 5/16/2013 12:32 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote: This reminds me of Isaac Asimov's 1, 2, 3, infinity You mean the one George Gamow wrote for him? Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

From an ancient Simpsons, from Homer to Bart: what is mind? Never matter. What is matter? Never mind. I will hold with Chalmers, on this one. That it is the hard problem. Perhaps like the pure materialists love to say, the mind is merely an epiphenomenon, of the human brain. Ok, but I ask

Re: The Leibniz-Taoist solution: Matter is mind, mind is matter

and free will. I contend that in such a case, there is no need for a morality or a soul. On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:08 PM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: From an ancient Simpsons, from Homer to Bart: what is mind? Never matter. What is matter? Never mind. I will hold with Chalmers, on this one

(w)holes in mind from matter

content - From: lennartn Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-10-05, 11:01:47 Subject: Re: Re: Subjectivity is no longer a dirty word! A nice videodiscussingthe dual aspect theory I recommend: Incomplete Nature: How Mind Emerged From Matter by Terrence Deacon, a professor

Re: MIND and MATTER

the mathematical Platonist assumption! BM: There are people like Alain Connes who are both mathematical platonist and material realist. (But wait him reading my stuff, I show that such attiude is epistemologicaly untenable!). But even if it was trivial that matter comes from mind for a mathematical

Re: MIND and MATTER

Dear Bruno, Interleaving. ;-) - Original Message - From: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Stephen Paul King [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 5:40 AM Subject: Re: MIND and MATTER Dear Stephen, I only have the vaguest hand waving reasoning at this time

Re: MIND and MATTER

On 31-Aug-02, Stephen Paul King wrote: Dear Bruno, Interleaving. ;-) - Original Message - From: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Stephen Paul King [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 5:40 AM Subject: Re: MIND and MATTER Dear Stephen, I only have