On Thursday, April 4, 2013 12:55:44 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:32 AM, Craig Weinberg
> > wrote:
> There are, of course, undiscovered scientific facts. If scientists did not
>>> believe that they would give up science. But Craig is not saying that there
>>> are processes inside cells that are controlled by as yet undiscovered
>>> physical effects. What he is saying is that if I decide to move my arm the
>>> arm will move not due to the well-studied sequence of neurological events,
>>> but "spontaneously", due to my will.
>> UGH. No. I say that if I move my arm, the arm will move because I AM
>> whatever sequence of events on whatever level - molecular, biochemical,
>> physiological, whether well-studied or not. You may not be able to
>> understand that what I intend is not to squeeze myself into biology, or to
>> magically replace biology, but to present that the entirety of the physics
>> of my body intersects with the entirety of the physics of my experience.
>> The two aesthetics - public bodies in space and private experiences through
>> time, are an involuted (Ouroboran, umbilical, involuted) Monism. If you
>> don't understand what that means then you are arguing with a straw man.
> If you ARE the sequence of neurological events and the neurological events
> follow deterministic or probabilistic rules then you will also follow
> deterministic or probabilistic rules.
That's a tautology. If I move my arm, then I am causing improbable
neurological events to occur. Muscles, cells, molecules follow my intention
rather than their own. The cells are not causing my arm to move - if they
were, that would be a spasm.
> However, you don't believe that this is the case. So sometimes there must
> be neurological events which are "spontaneous" according to your definition
> - outside the normal causal chain.
Spontaneous *IS* the normal causality. It isn't a 'chain'. The entire body
and brain serve a single purpose - to support a particular quality of
participatory experience. If it is not doing that, then the person is dead
or in a coma. Unconsciousness is your causal chain. Consciousness is
intentional self-modification of causality itself.
> Absent this, you return to the default scientific position.
The default scientific position is that particles decay after a "random"
duration (i.e. spontaneous), making each event in the cosmos subject to
non-deterministic and unique outcomes. Determinism is an approximate view
from a great distance. This is what Multisense Realism specifically
suggests: Perceptual relativity based on sense attenuation as the sole
> Stathis Papaioannou
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.