On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 7:34:27 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 4:30 AM Bruno Marchal <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > > >> >> Nobody knows the answer to the "hard problem of consciousness" >>> because nobody knows exactly what the question is or what criteria is to be >>> used to determine if its been successfully answered. >> >> >> > *So you don’t understand it.* >> > > Correct, I don't know the question so I have no way of knowing if it's > been successfully answered or not and after communicating with you for > years I don't think even you what would satisfy you. If I could prove with > mathematical certitude that X caused consciousness would you say the issue > had been put to bed and its time to move on to other things? I doubt it, > I think you'd say (correctly) that X may cause consciousness but X is not > consciousness. And the tail chasing would continue because you don't know > what exactly you want to know. > > >> * >It is not so astonishing. That explains your lack of interest in greek >> philosophy.* >> > > The fact that you ARE interested in Greek philosophy is tacit admission on > your part that the field you're so interested in has not advanced one > nanometer in 2500 years; after all no modern astronomer would dream of > studying Greek astronomical theories with the hope of it helping him in has > work because astronomy has advanced light years in the last 2500 years; and > the same is also true for medicine and mathematics and physics, but not for > Greek philosophy.. > > > The worst theologian are those who claim to know the truth. >> > > I agree, and the second worst type of theologian are those that abandon > the idea of God but believe they have made a great philosophical discovery > by not abandoned the ASCII sequence G-O-D. > > John K Clark >
It is odd that the phenomenon of consciousness would be a "hard" problem, as if other "problems" of nature would be "easy". We don't know what dark matter and dark energy are. There are a hundred papers on arXiv with different definitions and theories on those two "problems". We don't know if those terms are well defined - we only observe phenomena we associate with them. Physicists - at least in the articles they write for both scientific and science-for-the-general-reader publications - don't agree on what space, time, spacetime, or gravity are (e.g. loop quantum gravity vs. scale relativity vs. string theory vs. ...). There are unsolved problems in chemistry*. The medley of "quantum gravity" theories - attempts to meld GR and QM - make gravity** a "hard" problem. In the scheme of things, consciousness may be a "hard" problems, but science is full of such things. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_chemistry ** e.g. *Entropic gravity, also known as emergent gravity, is a theory in modern physics that describes gravity as an entropic force—a force with macro-scale homogeneity but which is subject to quantum-level disorder—and not a fundamental interaction. * @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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/b1641605-ff99-461c-b5cd-201e43a119a4%40googlegroups.com.
