> On 4 May 2020, at 05:14, smitra <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 03-05-2020 23:09, Philip Thrift wrote: >> The SSH >> https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/22/2/247 >> still lies in the "information turn" that plays in physics today.(IT >> FROM QUBIT, etc.) - a rejection pf materialism in favor of idealism. >> It is more interesting to me to stick to the vocabulary of >> materialist* physics - particles, fields, interactions, forces - but >> to approach CONSCIOUSNESS AS PURELY MATERIAL - adding a new >> force/interaction/particle/field as needed (like a sixth force/field). >> http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Field_theories_of_consciousness >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_theories_of_consciousness >> etc. >> * or physicalist >> @philipthrift > > Physicalism is a dead end. The hard problem of consciousness and other > philosophical problems can be considered to be no-go theorems against > physicalism.
Yes, that was the basic insight from which science is born with Pythagorus and Plato. Then Aristotle came back with the idea, by a sort of reaction. Most people want to believe in a creation (and sometimes in a creator). Matter is an invention so as to make the mind-body problem unsolvable, to allow superstition and fake religion to be used by tyran and manipulators (instead of doing research and accept pur ignorance). > Abandoning physicalism solves all these problems in one fell swoop. But it has to deduce physics from reason only. It is the origin of theoretical physics, but this has been missed by the metaphysicians. > But that also opens the door to wrong theories as people engaging with > non-physicalist theories can too easily advertise their pet theories because > they don't suffer from all the diseases physicalist theories suffer from. The > bar has to be set higher, I would like to see a derivation of the laws of > physics, not some vague argument that it is consistent with QM and unitary > evolution but a lot more detail than just that. If mechanism is true, physics is just the mathematics of the observable predicate, like []p & p with p partially computable, and []p & <>t, and []p & <>t & p, and then the G*/G separation, not only give the theory of quanta, but also the theory of qualia, and the explanation of consciousness, including why we cannot uindesrtand completely that theory, etc. There is no choice in this. Materialsm remains coherent, but ask for a non computationalist theory of mind, which simply does not exist (except for vague fairy tales which are simply not theories in the scientific meaning of the term). Bruno > > Saibal > > -- > 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/c7482009376988ca1402b892670c19da%40zonnet.nl. -- 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/5F4CE991-4935-4CD1-BAA1-566E8AB58893%40ulb.ac.be.
