On 06.07.2011 21:50 B Soroud said the following:
actually the famous physicist famously does play mystic. very
incoherently too.
are you trying to advance argument by authority i.e. "famous
physicist believes in classical metaphysics therefore there must be
something to it"?
Well, my question to you was ill-formed. Please ignore it.
In that quote I like the observation that I experience only my
consciousness. In general, I like starting with what other people saying
about a problem. Along this way it seems make sense to start with famous
people. It does not necessary mean that they are right. It was after all
just a quote.
By the way, I have just sent another quote from Schroedinger that shows
that his position probably could be considered as some mysticism. An
interesting questions why.
Well, if to speak about mysticism, in my collection there is a link to
John Hagelin, see for example
http://worldpeaceendowment.org/invincibility/invincibility8.html
You may want to compare Schroedinger with him.
Evgenii
http://blog.rudnyi.ru
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:36 PM, meekerdb<meeke...@verizon.net>
wrote:
On 7/6/2011 12:22 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 06.07.2011 05:14 Constantine Pseudonymous said the following:
Bruno assumes that consciousness preceded matter....
then why do we only find consciousness as a terrestrial
phenomena (suns and stars aren't conscious).. and as a later
stage terrestrial phenomena for that matter.... i.e. water,
plants, minerals etc. are not conscious..... and intellect and
understanding in any real sense are found in even later stage
terrestrial forms, and we have physical explanations for
this.......
Bruno sins against naturalism and all that we know and intuit.
He will do anything to resurrect from the dead some rudimentary
and vague Mysticism.
If talk about consciousness, then I guess the next quote from
Erwin Schrödinger should be appropriate
"The doctrine of identity can claim that it is clinched by the
empirical fact that consciousness is never experienced in the
plural, only in the singular. Not only has none of us ever
experienced more than one consciousness, but there is also no
trace of circumstantial evidence of this ever happening anywhere
in the world."
Of course we infer the consciousness of others. To experience more
than one consciousness at the same time seems to defy the meaning
of consciousness. But Schrodinger may have just had in mind that
consciousness is always associated with only a singular body -
unlike the Borg in which a single mind has many bodies.
Brent
What would you say to this? Does the famous physicist also plays
Mysticism?
A bit more from Schrödinger
http://blog.rudnyi.ru/2011/03/**the-arithmetical-paradox-the-**
oneness-of-mind.html<http://blog.rudnyi.ru/2011/03/the-arithmetical-paradox-the-oneness-of-mind.html>
Evgeny
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send
email to
everything-list@googlegroups.**com<everything-list@googlegroups.com>
.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscribe@
**googlegroups.com<everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
group/everything-list?hl=en<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 everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
