Panpsychism of any flavor that identifies matter with a psychic aspect is subject to the problems I described earlier.
It never occurred to me to google something like "theoretical psychology" <https://www.google.com/search?q=theoretical+psychology> but there's a lot there. How much of it is interesting, I don't know. I think as we flesh out the connectome, theoretical psychology will take on more legitimacy and importance. On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 5:16 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > > There is a whole spectrum of panpsychisms (plural) - from micropsychism to > cosmophychism: > > https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/ > cf. https://www.iep.utm.edu/panpsych/ > > That is not a "real science" yet is its basic problem of course. But > consciousness science in general really isn't yet either. > > One would think there would be a group of theoretical psychologists - > there is theoretical physics, chemistry, and biology, but theoretical > psychology is in a much weirder state - who would be involved. > > @philipthrift > > > On Friday, May 3, 2019 at 3:48:40 PM UTC-5, Terren Suydam wrote: >> >> My question for panpsychists is similar to my question for Cosmin: what >> does it buy you in terms of explanations or predictions? >> >> Just blanket-asserting that all matter is conscious doesn't tell me >> anything about consciousness itself. For example, what would it mean for my >> fingernails to be conscious? Does my fingernail consciousness factor in >> somehow to my own experience of consciousness? If so, how? What about all >> the other parts of my body, about individual cells? Does the bacteria >> living in my body contribute its consciousness somehow? It quickly runs >> aground on the same rocks that arguments about "soul" do - there's no >> principled way to talk about it that elucidates relationships between >> brains, bodies, and minds. Panpsychism does nothing to explain the effect >> of drugs on consciousness, or brain damage. Like Cosmin's ideas, it's all >> just post-hoc rationalization. Panpsychism is the philosophical equivalent >> of throwing your hands up and saying "I dunno, I guess it's all conscious >> somehow!" >> >> What I'm suggesting posits that consciousness arises from the cybernetic >> organization of a system, that what the system experiences, as a whole, is >> identified with the informational-dynamics captured by that organization. >> This yields explanations for the character of a given system's >> consciousness... something panpsychism cannot do. >> >> Terren >> >> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 3:57 PM <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> I see the coin made (as the ones lying on my desk right now made of >>> metal) of matter. >>> >>> The two sides of the coin (of matter) are *physical *and *psychical*: >>> >>> https://codicalist.wordpress.com/2019/01/22/matter-gets-psyched/ >>> >>> >>> If ὕ – the first Greek letter for “hyle”, upsilon (υ) with diacritics >>> dasia and oxia (U+1F55) – is used for the symbol of matter, φ (phi) for >>> physical, + ψ (psi) for psychical, then >>> >>> >>> ὕ = φ + ψ >>> >>> >>> (i.e., the combination of *physical* and *psychical* properties is a >>> more complete view of what matter is). The physical is the (quantitative) >>> behavioral aspect of matter – the kind that is formulated in mathematical >>> language in current physics, for example – whereas the psychical is the >>> (qualitative) experiential aspect of matter, at various levels, from brains >>> on down. There is no reason in principle for only φ to the considered by >>> science and for ψ to be ignored by science. >>> >>> @philipthrift >>> >>> >>> >>> On Friday, May 3, 2019 at 2:10:05 PM UTC-5, Terren Suydam wrote: >>>> >>>> I see them as two sides of the same coin - as in, you don't get one >>>> without the other. >>>> >>>> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 3:00 PM <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If "consciousness doesn't supervene on physical [or material] >>>>> computation" then does that mean there is realm for (A) consciousness and >>>>> one for (B) physical [or material] computation? >>>>> >>>>> Is A like some spirit or ghost that invades the domain of B? Or does B >>>>> invade A? >>>>> >>>>> @philipthrift >>>>> >>>>> >>> -- > 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.
