On Friday, April 26, 2019, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thursday, April 25, 2019 at 7:29:08 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 2:48 AM Philip Thrift <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, April 22, 2019 at 6:24:37 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> The above reminded me of this quote from Alan Turing: >>>> >>>> Personally I think that spirit is really eternally connected with >>>> matter but certainly not always by the same kind of body. I did believe it >>>> possible for a spirit at death to go to a universe entirely separate from >>>> our own, but now I consider that matter and spirit are so connected that >>>> this would be a contradiction in terms. It is possible however but unlikely >>>> that such universes may exist. >>>> >>>> Then as regards the actual connection between spirit and body >>>> I consider that the body by reason of being a living body can ``attract´´ >>>> and hold on to a ``spirit,´´ whilst the body is alive and awake the two are >>>> firmly connected. When the body is asleep I cannot guess what happens but >>>> when the body dies the ``mechanism´´ of the body, holding the spirit is >>>> gone and the spirit finds a new body sooner or later perhaps immediately. >>>> >>>> Jason >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> I don't think I've seen this quote of Turing before, but it immediately >>> reminds me of *Epicurus *(an ancient panpsychist): >>> >>> [SEP: Epicurus] >>> >>> Having established the physical basis of the world, Epicurus proceeds to >>> explain the nature of the soul (this, at least, is the order in which >>> Lucretius sets things out). This too, of course, consists of atoms: first, >>> there is nothing that is not made up of atoms and void (secondary qualities >>> are simply accidents of the arrangement of atoms), and second, an >>> incorporeal entity could neither act on nor be moved by bodies, as the soul >>> is seen to do (e.g., it is conscious of what happens to the body, and it >>> initiates physical movement). Epicurus maintains that soul atoms are >>> particularly fine and are distributed throughout the body, and it is by >>> means of them that we have sensations (aisthêseis) and the experience of >>> pain and pleasure, which Epicurus calls pathê (a term used by Aristotle and >>> others to signify emotions instead). >>> >> >> Nice quote. A bit reminiscent of Descartes and Leibniz's thinking in >> relation to dualism and how souls were to interact with physical bodies. >> >> Descartes understood a basic form of conservation of energy, and thought >> it was possible for a soul to change the direction (if not the speed) of >> particles. After Newton formalized conservation of momentum, Leibniz >> understood that changing the direction of particles in motion was also >> impossible, which led to his postulation of a "pre-established harmony". >> >> >>> >>> *Body without soul atoms is unconscious and inert, and when the atoms of >>> the body are disarranged so that it can no longer support conscious life, >>> the soul atoms are scattered and no longer retain the capacity for >>> sensation. * >>> >>> ~~~ >>> >>> (Since atoms - either physical (body) or psychical (soul) atoms are not >>> destroyed in Epicurus's materialism, the psychical atoms which were >>> "scattered" end up in someone's new body at some point.) >>> >>> >> In panpsychism isn't everything consider to be conscious? I think this >> is a bit different from what Turing suggested, in that Turing believed the >> body had to be in a functioning state to "attract" or "hold" a soul. >> >> Jason >> > > > Pansychism (a better term would be experiential materialism) is the view > that all is matter, but matter has psychical or experiential properties (in > addition to physical ones - the ones conventional physicists talk about). > The degrees of experientialities in levels of complexity of matter (and a > brain would be considered to be a piece of complex matter), how such things > are combined (from molecules to cells to multicellular configurations), are > the issues. >
What would a panpsychist predict for a universe where matter lacked such properties? A world devoid of intelligent life. A world full of intelligent (but not consciousness) philosophical zombies. Something else. > > Physicalism is normally assumed to be incompatible with panpsychism. > Materialism (distinct from physicalism) is compatible with panpsychism > insofar as experiential (or psychical) properties are attributed to matter, > which is the only basic substance. > > via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism#Physicalism_and_materialism > > So there are brains and all the other other stuff, its just that there is > more to matter than what meets the (conventional physicist's) eye. > > - > @philipthrift <https://twitter.com/philipthrift> > > > Thanks for the reference. It was an interesting read. Jason > > -- > 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 https://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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
