Telmo, some 2+ decades ago I think I had a reason to avert from the topic called *panpsychism* (would be hard to recall it adequately now). As I remember I called the phenomenon covered by this misnomer PANSENSITIVITY (what I would not like to defend today anymore). Psych seems to me too 'human' to be applicable to the entire world (=Mme. Nature). Why would you reduce the MWI reflexibility into ourflimsy human brainfunctions? (Even i f you extend them into <human?> mentality total).
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Telmo Menezes <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 6:48 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Sunday, May 4, 2014 1:43:12 PM UTC+1, telmo_menezes wrote: >>> >>> The machine: >>> http://existentialcomics.com/comic/1 >>> >>> Bad news from the doctor: >>> http://existentialcomics.com/comic/11 >>> >>> Turing test: >>> http://existentialcomics.com/comic/15 >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Telmo. >>> >> >> >> So where do you stand on this Telmo? I suppose I've rather raised my >> hopes that your answer, like mine, is not straight forward. >> > > I have no explanation for consciousness. My current inclination is > panpsychism. > > >> Maybe just because I'm just lonely since Liz walked out on me...this >> vague cloud of abstraction never seemed so cavernous when she was around, >> her 70's punk echoing through the theory of nothing that - well you know >> itt wasn't a theory, but maybe it wasn't nuthin' neither. >> > > Hey, I like 70's punk rock too! > > >> >> Seriously, I saw a hint of scientific realism in something you said at >> some point. Nearly vanished but managed to block my ears when you started >> talking about consciousness not between the ears. Don't do that. >> > > I believe that science is the only valid tool we have to understand public > reality. If you have a good "consciousness between the ears" theory then... > I'm all ears. Other theories are ok too. My position is that what makes a > theory scientific is it's falsifiability, that's all. It doesn't matter how > weird the theory sounds, it only matters if it makes valid predictions or > not. Common sense has been shown to be misleading many times, and to an > amazing degree with quantum mechanics. > > I am not sure that consciousness will ever be investigated by science, > because I'm not sure it will ever be possible to measure it or test for > it's presence. In this case (or meanwhile), we have to make do with thought > experiments and introspection on private reality. > > Telmo. > >> -- >> 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 [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- > 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 [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
