On 25.08.2012 23:32 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/25/2012 2:26 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 25.08.2012 22:25 meekerdb said the following:
On 8/23/2012 1:04 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
The hardest part of the mind/body problem is figuring out exactly
what the mind/body
An explanation on how consciousness arises in the body.
and what "solving" it is supposed to mean.
Know how consciousness works and how it is related to the physical
It's useful to think of what kind of explanation we might find
satisfactory. In other fields, once we have an explanation that fits in
with other theories and which allows use to manipulate or predict things
we call it an explanation. When Newton came up with his theory of
gravity he was asked how gravity exerted a force at a distance. He
replied "Hypothesi non fingo." Yet gravity was considered a good
explanation of planetary motion, ballistics, and other phenomena.
Eventually, Einstein found a better explanation - one that agreed with a
few more observations and which answered the force-at-a-distance
problem. But it still leaves the question; how does matter warp
spacetime? And Einstein might have given the same answer as Newton.
That's why I think that when consciousness is 'explained' it will just
be that we will have solved the engineering problems of AI and robotics
to such a degree that everyone will agree that we can make conscious
robots and that we can make them with different personalities and we can
manipulated and interconnect brains in ways that people describe as
changing their consciousness, etc. And we will just stop thinking of
consciousness as "the hard problem" because it will be seen as an
ancillary question - like, how does gravity act at a distance.
Do you mean that when the evolution according to the M-theory proceeds
further, then such a question will not be instantiated anymore in the
brain of scientists?
Evolution of what? What question?
I believe that you accept the viewpoint that the physical laws are
causally closed and that there are physical laws that describe the
transient development of our universe including human beings. Is this
If yes, then my question was related to the fact that now in brains of
some people the physical laws instantiate a question what is
consciousness. Hence I have guessed that in the future such a question
will not be instantiated anymore.
Could you please apply the compatibilist viewpoint to engineers? How
would you describe what a creativity of engineers is according to
Why should I? I didn't use the word "compatibilism". What's your
definition of "compatibilism"? of "creativity"?
If we speak about creativity of engineers, I would say that we are back
to a question of free will. Hence was my question about compatibilism.
Or do you think we could separate creativity of engineers from free will
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at