On 02 Jul 2011, at 23:10, B Soroud wrote:
a question I want to pose to the community as well as Bruno is:
Bruno, have you ever seriously studied Nietzsche... he is probably
the single most persuasive critic of Platonism that has ever existed.
By platonism I just mean the idea that ideas are primary and matter is
generated by the ideas. With comp it can be shown we need only two
ideas: addition and multiplication of natural numbers (together with
some tiny amount of classical logic).
If you get the point you can understand how this is completely
testable. Meanwhile it explains tha quantum appearance of nature, the
non booleanity of the observable, etc. I mean the facts seems to favor
comp and Platonism, and in my opinion, materialism will disappear, and
taken as a very deeply "Darwinianly" preprogrammed sort of
superstition. The greek and Indian mystics and rationalist might be
right, with respect of the coherent mechanist theology.
I read Nietzsche a long time ago, I loved Zarathustra, but find his
text on Plato non convincing, but I might have been too young.
I tend to think that many philosophers confuse or are unclear about
first person truth (Bp & p) and third person communicable truth (Bp).
Don't mind too much the modal operator, until you read and grasp
(hopefully) the consequences of comp in the "classical machine
theology".
You might try to sum up Nietzsche argument against "platonism" so that
can we see if it is relevant. If it does not appear as an argulment
against comp, then it might point on a flaw in the UD reasoning, which
could be something interesting. To be honest I have some doubt
because, like many, Nietzsche confuses mechanism and materialism.
Note also that comp contradicts Plato's *politics*, but not Plato's
theology, especially as understood by the neoplatonist and
neoPythagorean, and then the machines.
Bruno
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 2:08 PM, B Soroud <[email protected]> wrote:
it just seems to me that mentality might be a better term to use
then consciousness...
this is a notoriously difficult problem....
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Stephen Paul King <[email protected]
> wrote:
Hi B,
Speaking only for myself, I do believe that consciousness is
causally effective, in the sense that if it did not exist then
certain other features of the world would not exist and that my
belief that I (an indicator for inner subjective experience of
“being in the world”) is not just an illusion.
Is this belief justified? Hard to say, but so far I have not
found that the materialist, physicalist, etc. have successfully
given me unassailable reasons to believe that by experience of
“being in the world” is just some kind of nonsense that we lie to
ourselves about., pace Dennett, Churchland, etc.
I supposed that I might be considered a dualist, but unlike
Descartes, I argue against the notion of substance as an ontological
primitive; instead it is proposed that all properties emerge from
process ala Bergson and Heraclitus. I see mind and body as a
specific instantiations of the Stone duality and the relation
between them is an isomorphism. There is no “causal link” between
the two, in the Humean sense, needed. For an elaboration of this
view see: http://boole.stanford.edu/pub/ratmech.pdf
AFAIK, Bruno adheres to an Idealist version of Platonism. We
welcome your thoughts and comments.
Onward!
Stephen
From: B Soroud
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2011 3:25 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: consciousness
furthermore you seem to conceive of a consciousness apart from its
properties... you are making the erroneous distinction of attribute
and essence.... you sound much like Descartes.
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 12:24 PM, B Soroud <[email protected]> wrote:
"A property of consciousness is"
it sounds like you are reifying "consciousness"... consciousness is
not a thing in itself, consciousness does not exist in and of
itself... it can only be understood within the interdependent and
complex framework of sensation, bodies, space.... consciousness of
something, in and through something.... inseparable from the system
of space, energy, matter and motion... and essential equal to it....
not something seperate and distinct from it that can exist
independently of it....
consciousness is not something that exists in itself....
consciousness is always embodied consciousness of life.... in and
through life and the complex instrument of form and the mystery of
sensation and generation. Consciousness is a phenomena of the "body"
and its natural system... and is equal to that "body" and "body
system".
it sounds like you guys are reifing consciousness....
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Pzomby <[email protected]> wrote:
On Jul 1, 4:23 am, selva kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is consciousness causally effective ?
>
In my opinion, yes, if in simple terms, it is logically correct to
state: A property of consciousness is….the capacity and ability of
individual human consciousness to create intentionally desired
physical and mental effects.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
