>> In my view, physics, experience, and the underlying relation between >> them are all co-phenomenal and co-epiphenomenal > >I have no idea what that means.
I'm trying to say that from the vantage point of physical externality, experience is deterministically caused by physical laws, but from the perspective of subjective experience, it is the self which chooses to cause physical changes to the world through the instrument of their mind and body. Both sides are self-knowing and self-ignorant and reflect additional levels of self-knowing and self-ignorance through interaction with each other. >> > 2) What is it about the mathematical structures and functions of your >> > New >> > Physics that makes it more apt for describing experience than the >> > Old Physics? > >> Because it recognizes that experience cannot be described in third >> person terms > >How can you have physics that is not describable in 3 terms? How >do people write papers about it or devise tests for it. By becoming smarter about it. It freaks me out to hear that the response to "Here is the simple truth of what the cosmos actually is" should be "how do people write papers about it?". Lets put paper writing in the museum and make 10 dimensional virtual reality demonstrations about it instead. Craig http://s33light.org On Jul 21, 5:59 pm, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jul 21, 8:23 pm, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 1) if conventional physics gives an adequate causal account,does and > > > experience is explained > > > with New Physics, does that make experience epiphenomenal? > > > In my view, physics, experience, and the underlying relation between > > them are all co-phenomenal and co-epiphenomenal > > I have no idea what that means. > > > > 2) What is it about the mathematical structures and functions of your > > > New > > > Physics that makes it more apt for describing experience than the > > > Old Physics? > > > Because it recognizes that experience cannot be described in third > > person terms > > How can you have physics that is not describable in 3 terms? How > do people write papers about it or devise tests for it. > > > > > > > > >, and that this fact is not a problem. Rather, the > > compulsion to turn it into a problem is explained by the understanding > > that we ourselves are inherently biased because we cannot get outside > > of the sense of our own collective experience. Instead, we see the > > function of privatized phenomenology as a natural feature of, as well > > as a function of matter. -- 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.
