Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 17 Jun 2019, at 11:13, Philip Thrift  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 2:54:28 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
>> On 16 Jun 2019, at 13:46, Philip Thrift > 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sunday, June 16, 2019 at 6:25:57 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> 
>>> On 15 Jun 2019, at 20:57, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>>> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Panpsychism is just the position adopted by those still afraid to leave 
>>> materialism behind and go to idealism.
>> 
>> I agree. And it eliminates or trivialises the psychism by identifying it 
>> with everything. It is materialism, structured in a way to prevent *any* 
>> theory of mind.
>> 
>> Bruno
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> But I adhere to panpsychic materialism.
>> 
>> So there. :)
> 
> If you assume a material reality at the start, you need to abandon the 
> mechanist hypothesis in cognitive science. Your brain and body need a non 
> computational solution of some differential equation, so that your 
> “substitution level” is made infinitely low. But then, you need to abandon 
> the theory of evolution by Darwin, molecular genetics, and this leads to a 
> form of super determinism, where you and your brain exists only due to 
> infinitely precise initial conditions. This eliminates the possibility of 
> using the Mechanist theory of consciousness, to allow a necessity of some 
> ontological commitment. That looks like making things more complicated, 
> without evidence, just to cherish a conception of reality that you like, and 
> which speculates on evidences not yet obtained. It is logically coherent 
> (unlike those who want both primary matter and Mechanism), but seems *very* 
> speculative to me. 
> 
> Bruno
> 
> 
> 
> As I wrote elsewhere:
> 
> The problem with "all is arithmetic/numbers" and "all is 
> consciousness/qualia” 

Of course, that is already a contradiction.



> is that while we know we have a "self" (our self-experience of consciousness) 
> and may even believe in (the fiction of) mathematics, we are in a world

We certainly “are in a world”. The question is what is the nature of the world. 
A dream? A computation? Infinitely many computations? Or an irreducibly 
material world. My point is that IF Mechanism is true in cognitive science, 
then the physical reality is explainable without an ontological commitment in 
an irreducible physical reality. 
There is nothing from with physics, but physicalism is incoherent, in that 
mechanist setting.





> where we see the science news* of materials science -- where some 
> scientists/technologists find some really frickingly weird property of some 
> exotic material. So there is all this weird stuff we find out about new 
> materials, to say nothing of stuff we don't know about, like dark matter. (As 
> Auden said, "Matter is much / Odder than we thought.”)

That is a prediction of mechanism: the phenomenology is unbounded in the number 
of surprises, even just ion numbers. Yes, matter is much odder than we can 
think, and the mind too. But with mechanism, the first is reducible to the 
second.



> 
> If there isn't some sort of "independent" material world (which we are 
> embedded in though),

But there is an independent of “us” (us the humans) physical reality.
There is no independent of “us” (us the universal numbers) physical reality.



> then where does these surprising material properties discovered by materials 
> scientists come from?

It comes from the more sophisticated consequences of 2+2=4. That is the amazing 
consequence of incompleteness. Even limited to third person arithmetical facts, 
there is an infinity of surprises.



> Do we just dream them up as we dream up matter itself, or they come out of 
> Peano arithmetic?

They comes from Robinson Arithmetic (a quite tiny subset of Peano Arithmetic). 
Peano arithmetic is the dreamer, whose existence is provided by Robinson 
arithmetic.



> 
> * https://news.google.com/search?q=materials%20science
> 
> Since we don't know all the properties of matter (it could have both 
> extrinsic arithmetical and intrinsic qualial properties), one can't conclude 
> anything about what follows from assuming its "primary" existence.

If we assume that matter has a primary existence, and that there is a relation 
between matter and consciousness (that matter is related to what we observe), 
we have to bring a non computational theory of mind. 

Bruno



> 
> @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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/8c868209-860c-41b5-8a2f-8d2fb54aea5d%40googlegroups.com
>  
> 

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Philip Thrift]

On Monday, June 17, 2019 at 2:54:28 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 16 Jun 2019, at 13:46, Philip Thrift > 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sunday, June 16, 2019 at 6:25:57 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 15 Jun 2019, at 20:57, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List <
>> everyth...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>>
>> Panpsychism is just the position adopted by those still afraid to leave 
>> materialism behind and go to idealism.
>>
>>
>> I agree. And it eliminates or trivialises the psychism by identifying it 
>> with everything. It is materialism, structured in a way to prevent *any* 
>> theory of mind.
>>
>> Bruno
>>
>>
>>
> But I adhere to *panpsychic materialism*.
>
> So there. :)
>
>
> If you assume a material reality at the start, you need to abandon the 
> mechanist hypothesis in cognitive science. Your brain and body need a non 
> computational solution of some differential equation, so that your 
> “substitution level” is made infinitely low. But then, you need to abandon 
> the theory of evolution by Darwin, molecular genetics, and this leads to a 
> form of super determinism, where you and your brain exists only due to 
> infinitely precise initial conditions. This eliminates the possibility of 
> using the Mechanist theory of consciousness, to allow a necessity of some 
> ontological commitment. That looks like making things more complicated, 
> without evidence, just to cherish a conception of reality that you like, 
> and which speculates on evidences not yet obtained. It is logically 
> coherent (unlike those who want both primary matter and Mechanism), but 
> seems *very* speculative to me. 
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
As I wrote elsewhere:

The problem with "all is arithmetic/numbers" and "all is 
consciousness/qualia"  is that while we know we have a "self" (our 
self-experience of consciousness) and may even believe in (the fiction of) 
mathematics, we are in a world where we see the science news* of materials 
science -- where some scientists/technologists find some really frickingly 
weird property of some exotic material. So there is all this weird stuff we 
find out about new materials, to say nothing of stuff we don't know about, 
like dark matter. (As Auden said, "*Matter is much / Odder than we 
thought."*)

If there isn't some sort of "independent" material world (which we are 
embedded in though), then where does these surprising material properties 
discovered by materials scientists come from? Do we just dream them up as 
we dream up matter itself, or they come out of Peano arithmetic?

* https://news.google.com/search?q=materials%20science

Since we don't know all the properties of matter (it could have both 
extrinsic arithmetical and intrinsic qualial properties), one can't 
conclude anything about what follows from assuming its "primary" existence.

@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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/8c868209-860c-41b5-8a2f-8d2fb54aea5d%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 16 Jun 2019, at 13:46, Philip Thrift  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Sunday, June 16, 2019 at 6:25:57 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> 
>> On 15 Jun 2019, at 20:57, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>> > wrote:
>> 
>> Panpsychism is just the position adopted by those still afraid to leave 
>> materialism behind and go to idealism.
> 
> I agree. And it eliminates or trivialises the psychism by identifying it with 
> everything. It is materialism, structured in a way to prevent *any* theory of 
> mind.
> 
> Bruno
> 
> 
> 
> But I adhere to panpsychic materialism.
> 
> So there. :)

If you assume a material reality at the start, you need to abandon the 
mechanist hypothesis in cognitive science. Your brain and body need a non 
computational solution of some differential equation, so that your 
“substitution level” is made infinitely low. But then, you need to abandon the 
theory of evolution by Darwin, molecular genetics, and this leads to a form of 
super determinism, where you and your brain exists only due to infinitely 
precise initial conditions. This eliminates the possibility of using the 
Mechanist theory of consciousness, to allow a necessity of some ontological 
commitment. That looks like making things more complicated, without evidence, 
just to cherish a conception of reality that you like, and which speculates on 
evidences not yet obtained. It is logically coherent (unlike those who want 
both primary matter and Mechanism), but seems *very* speculative to me. 

Bruno



> 
> @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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/32f0d579-1a93-4b40-acdd-54f25f97df7a%40googlegroups.com
>  
> .

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/7D5B8D8E-0D3F-4F2E-BAAD-F597F220CDFE%40ulb.ac.be.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Philip Thrift]

On Sunday, June 16, 2019 at 12:36:52 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2019 at 10:20, Philip Thrift  > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 5:40:56 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2019 at 00:21, Philip Thrift  wrote:
>>>


 On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 4:06:27 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 14:16, Philip Thrift  
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Thus the rejection of panpsychism can be overcome by logical 
>> analysis, historical and cultural reflection, and perhaps even by 
>> chemical 
>> ingestion. 
>>
>>
>> https://highexistence.com/panpsychism-3-reasons-why-our-world-brimming-sentience/
>>
>> via @PeterSjostedtH 
>>
>>
>> Not quite my panpsychic materialism, but chemistry is involved!
>>
>> Panpsychiam is not consistent with functionalism, whereby if you 
>> change a part of the brain with a functional equivalent the subject 
>> notices 
>> no difference. This is because panpsychism is fundamentally substrate 
>> dependent. But there are good reasons for assuming that consciousness is 
>> substrate independent.
>>
>> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
>

 What are those?

>>>
>>> It would lead to a decoupling of consciousness and behaviour or to 
>>> partial zombies, entities which undergo gross changes in consciousness but 
>>> neither change their behaviour nor recognise it. See this paper by David 
>>> Chalmers:
>>>
>>> http://consc.net/papers/qualia.html
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Stathis Papaioannou
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> See this paper by David Chalmers (which I think is written more than 20 
>> years after the above paper). At least Chalmers seems to be closer now to 
>> Philip Goff and Hedda Mørch.
>>
>> http://consc.net/papers/panpsychism.pdf
>>
>> *Panpsychism and Panprotopsychism*
>> David J. Chalmers
>>
>> ..
>>
>> In my Hegelian argument, the thesis is materialism, the antithesis is 
>> dualism, and the
>> synthesis is panpsychism. The argument for the thesis is the causal 
>> argument for materialism
>> (and against dualism). The argument for the antithesis is the 
>> conceivability argument for dualism
>> (and against materialism). Synthesized, these yield the Hegelian argument 
>> for panpsychism. In
>> effect, the argument presents the two most powerful arguments for and 
>> against materialism and
>> dualism, and motivates a certain sort of panpsychism as a view that 
>> captures the virtues of both
>> views and the vices of neither.
>>
>> It turns out that the Hegelian argument does not support only 
>> panpsychism. It also supports a
>> certain sort of *panprotopsychism*: roughly, the view that fundamental 
>> entities are protoconscious, that is, that they have certain special 
>> properties that are precursors to consciousness
>> and that can collectively constitute consciousness in larger systems. 
>> Later in the article, I will
>> examine the relative merits of panpsychism and panprotopsychism, and 
>> examine problems that
>> arise for both.
>>
>> ...
>> ,I think that the Hegelian argument gives good reason to take both 
>> panpsychism and
>> panprotopsychism very seriously. If we can find a reasonable solution to 
>> the combination
>> problem for either, this view would immediately become the most promising 
>> solution to the
>> mind–body problem. So the combination problem deserves serious and 
>> sustained attention.
>>
>
> The “fading qualia” argument in the earlier paper is a robust one, not 
> dependent on any assumptions about consciousness, or even a definition 
> beyond a minimal operational one: you know it if you have it. It has not 
> been refuted. Although Chalmers has panpsychist tendencies he has not 
> addressed the clash with his own argument.
>
>> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
>



I (and Philip Goff) is glad he's evolving. :)

@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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/b58db369-2bdf-474f-8b96-7a1b8287b34d%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2019 at 10:20, Philip Thrift  wrote:

>
>
> On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 5:40:56 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2019 at 00:21, Philip Thrift  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 4:06:27 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:



 On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 14:16, Philip Thrift  wrote:

>
>
> Thus the rejection of panpsychism can be overcome by logical analysis,
> historical and cultural reflection, and perhaps even by chemical 
> ingestion.
>
>
> https://highexistence.com/panpsychism-3-reasons-why-our-world-brimming-sentience/
>
> via @PeterSjostedtH 
>
>
> Not quite my panpsychic materialism, but chemistry is involved!
>
> Panpsychiam is not consistent with functionalism, whereby if you
> change a part of the brain with a functional equivalent the subject 
> notices
> no difference. This is because panpsychism is fundamentally substrate
> dependent. But there are good reasons for assuming that consciousness is
> substrate independent.
>
> --
 Stathis Papaioannou

>>>
>>> What are those?
>>>
>>
>> It would lead to a decoupling of consciousness and behaviour or to
>> partial zombies, entities which undergo gross changes in consciousness but
>> neither change their behaviour nor recognise it. See this paper by David
>> Chalmers:
>>
>> http://consc.net/papers/qualia.html
>>
>> --
>> Stathis Papaioannou
>>
>
>
>
> See this paper by David Chalmers (which I think is written more than 20
> years after the above paper). At least Chalmers seems to be closer now to
> Philip Goff and Hedda Mørch.
>
> http://consc.net/papers/panpsychism.pdf
>
> *Panpsychism and Panprotopsychism*
> David J. Chalmers
>
> ..
>
> In my Hegelian argument, the thesis is materialism, the antithesis is
> dualism, and the
> synthesis is panpsychism. The argument for the thesis is the causal
> argument for materialism
> (and against dualism). The argument for the antithesis is the
> conceivability argument for dualism
> (and against materialism). Synthesized, these yield the Hegelian argument
> for panpsychism. In
> effect, the argument presents the two most powerful arguments for and
> against materialism and
> dualism, and motivates a certain sort of panpsychism as a view that
> captures the virtues of both
> views and the vices of neither.
>
> It turns out that the Hegelian argument does not support only panpsychism.
> It also supports a
> certain sort of *panprotopsychism*: roughly, the view that fundamental
> entities are protoconscious, that is, that they have certain special
> properties that are precursors to consciousness
> and that can collectively constitute consciousness in larger systems.
> Later in the article, I will
> examine the relative merits of panpsychism and panprotopsychism, and
> examine problems that
> arise for both.
>
> ...
> ,I think that the Hegelian argument gives good reason to take both
> panpsychism and
> panprotopsychism very seriously. If we can find a reasonable solution to
> the combination
> problem for either, this view would immediately become the most promising
> solution to the
> mind–body problem. So the combination problem deserves serious and
> sustained attention.
>

The “fading qualia” argument in the earlier paper is a robust one, not
dependent on any assumptions about consciousness, or even a definition
beyond a minimal operational one: you know it if you have it. It has not
been refuted. Although Chalmers has panpsychist tendencies he has not
addressed the clash with his own argument.

> --
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypVWdkW56sBztdDTznEcAEcAkScd%2B5ZL87ZuokGdmqAq-A%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Philip Thrift]

On Sunday, June 16, 2019 at 6:25:57 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 15 Jun 2019, at 20:57, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
> Panpsychism is just the position adopted by those still afraid to leave 
> materialism behind and go to idealism.
>
>
> I agree. And it eliminates or trivialises the psychism by identifying it 
> with everything. It is materialism, structured in a way to prevent *any* 
> theory of mind.
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
But I adhere to *panpsychic materialism*.

So there. :)

@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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/32f0d579-1a93-4b40-acdd-54f25f97df7a%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 16 Jun 2019, at 09:20, Philip Thrift  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 5:40:56 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2019 at 00:21, Philip Thrift  > wrote:
> 
> 
> On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 4:06:27 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 14:16, Philip Thrift > wrote:
> 
> 
> Thus the rejection of panpsychism can be overcome by logical analysis, 
> historical and cultural reflection, and perhaps even by chemical ingestion. 
> 
> https://highexistence.com/panpsychism-3-reasons-why-our-world-brimming-sentience/
>  
> 
> 
> via @PeterSjostedtH 
> 
> 
> Not quite my panpsychic materialism, but chemistry is involved!
> 
> Panpsychiam is not consistent with functionalism, whereby if you change a 
> part of the brain with a functional equivalent the subject notices no 
> difference. This is because panpsychism is fundamentally substrate dependent. 
> But there are good reasons for assuming that consciousness is substrate 
> independent.
> 
> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
> 
> What are those?
> 
> It would lead to a decoupling of consciousness and behaviour or to partial 
> zombies, entities which undergo gross changes in consciousness but neither 
> change their behaviour nor recognise it. See this paper by David Chalmers:
> 
> http://consc.net/papers/qualia.html 
> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
> 
> 
> 
> See this paper by David Chalmers (which I think is written more than 20 years 
> after the above paper). At least Chalmers seems to be closer now to Philip 
> Goff and Hedda Mørch.
> 
> http://consc.net/papers/panpsychism.pdf
> 
> Panpsychism and Panprotopsychism
> David J. Chalmers
> 
> ..
> 
> In my Hegelian argument, the thesis is materialism, the antithesis is dualism,


Of course, with Mechanism, dualism is still a “Materialism” in the weak sense 
that I used, and the antithesis ion materialism is just immaterialism.

To make sense of this panpsychism, you need to assume a non computationalist 
theory of mind.

His analysis of Everett in one of its book was also going in the anti-mechanist 
conception of mind.

Bruno




> and the
> synthesis is panpsychism. The argument for the thesis is the causal argument 
> for materialism
> (and against dualism). The argument for the antithesis is the conceivability 
> argument for dualism
> (and against materialism). Synthesized, these yield the Hegelian argument for 
> panpsychism. In
> effect, the argument presents the two most powerful arguments for and against 
> materialism and
> dualism, and motivates a certain sort of panpsychism as a view that captures 
> the virtues of both
> views and the vices of neither.
> 
> It turns out that the Hegelian argument does not support only panpsychism. It 
> also supports a
> certain sort of panprotopsychism: roughly, the view that fundamental entities 
> are protoconscious, that is, that they have certain special properties that 
> are precursors to consciousness
> and that can collectively constitute consciousness in larger systems. Later 
> in the article, I will
> examine the relative merits of panpsychism and panprotopsychism, and examine 
> problems that
> arise for both.
> 
> ...
> ,I think that the Hegelian argument gives good reason to take both 
> panpsychism and
> panprotopsychism very seriously. If we can find a reasonable solution to the 
> combination
> problem for either, this view would immediately become the most promising 
> solution to the
> mind–body problem. So the combination problem deserves serious and sustained 
> attention.
> 
> @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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c2dd889a-cce5-4f00-911e-5543f472395a%40googlegroups.com
>  
> .

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/725713B0-2751-49C4-9151-C5A17184F83D%40ulb.ac.be.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Bruno Marchal]

> On 15 Jun 2019, at 20:57, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List 
>  wrote:
> 
> Panpsychism is just the position adopted by those still afraid to leave 
> materialism behind and go to idealism.

I agree. And it eliminates or trivialises the psychism by identifying it with 
everything. It is materialism, structured in a way to prevent *any* theory of 
mind.

Bruno



> 
> -- 
> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/45b696f3-1ca9-4104-bbb7-0ef17297a3b8%40googlegroups.com
>  
> .

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/19C44D52-1E99-4A85-8423-1B95E14EFC6A%40ulb.ac.be.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Philip Thrift]

On Sunday, June 16, 2019 at 2:35:18 AM UTC-5, Cosmin Visan wrote:
>
> "Proto" = empty word that we just use in order to make fancy theories that 
> don't mean anything.
>

That is pretty much right. "Theories" are funny things. Physicists think 
that they have 'theories" for stuff, but don't realize how meager their 
"theories" are. 

@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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/6a4d50eb-b22f-45ff-8345-0ad4d0d44f71%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

['Cosmin Visan' via Everything List]

"Proto" = empty word that we just use in order to make fancy theories that 
don't mean anything.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c86c587d-bd79-4994-972e-f5e84475b544%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Philip Thrift]

On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 5:40:56 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2019 at 00:21, Philip Thrift  > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 4:06:27 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 14:16, Philip Thrift  wrote:
>>>


 Thus the rejection of panpsychism can be overcome by logical analysis, 
 historical and cultural reflection, and perhaps even by chemical 
 ingestion. 


 https://highexistence.com/panpsychism-3-reasons-why-our-world-brimming-sentience/

 via @PeterSjostedtH 


 Not quite my panpsychic materialism, but chemistry is involved!

 Panpsychiam is not consistent with functionalism, whereby if you change 
 a part of the brain with a functional equivalent the subject notices no 
 difference. This is because panpsychism is fundamentally substrate 
 dependent. But there are good reasons for assuming that consciousness is 
 substrate independent.

 -- 
>>> Stathis Papaioannou
>>>
>>
>> What are those?
>>
>
> It would lead to a decoupling of consciousness and behaviour or to partial 
> zombies, entities which undergo gross changes in consciousness but neither 
> change their behaviour nor recognise it. See this paper by David Chalmers:
>
> http://consc.net/papers/qualia.html
>
> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
>



See this paper by David Chalmers (which I think is written more than 20 
years after the above paper). At least Chalmers seems to be closer now to 
Philip Goff and Hedda Mørch.

http://consc.net/papers/panpsychism.pdf

*Panpsychism and Panprotopsychism*
David J. Chalmers

..

In my Hegelian argument, the thesis is materialism, the antithesis is 
dualism, and the
synthesis is panpsychism. The argument for the thesis is the causal 
argument for materialism
(and against dualism). The argument for the antithesis is the 
conceivability argument for dualism
(and against materialism). Synthesized, these yield the Hegelian argument 
for panpsychism. In
effect, the argument presents the two most powerful arguments for and 
against materialism and
dualism, and motivates a certain sort of panpsychism as a view that 
captures the virtues of both
views and the vices of neither.

It turns out that the Hegelian argument does not support only panpsychism. 
It also supports a
certain sort of *panprotopsychism*: roughly, the view that fundamental 
entities are protoconscious, that is, that they have certain special 
properties that are precursors to consciousness
and that can collectively constitute consciousness in larger systems. Later 
in the article, I will
examine the relative merits of panpsychism and panprotopsychism, and 
examine problems that
arise for both.

...
,I think that the Hegelian argument gives good reason to take both 
panpsychism and
panprotopsychism very seriously. If we can find a reasonable solution to 
the combination
problem for either, this view would immediately become the most promising 
solution to the
mind–body problem. So the combination problem deserves serious and 
sustained attention.

@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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c2dd889a-cce5-4f00-911e-5543f472395a%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2019 at 00:21, Philip Thrift  wrote:

>
>
> On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 4:06:27 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 14:16, Philip Thrift  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thus the rejection of panpsychism can be overcome by logical analysis,
>>> historical and cultural reflection, and perhaps even by chemical ingestion.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://highexistence.com/panpsychism-3-reasons-why-our-world-brimming-sentience/
>>>
>>> via @PeterSjostedtH 
>>>
>>>
>>> Not quite my panpsychic materialism, but chemistry is involved!
>>>
>>> Panpsychiam is not consistent with functionalism, whereby if you change
>>> a part of the brain with a functional equivalent the subject notices no
>>> difference. This is because panpsychism is fundamentally substrate
>>> dependent. But there are good reasons for assuming that consciousness is
>>> substrate independent.
>>>
>>> --
>> Stathis Papaioannou
>>
>
> What are those?
>

It would lead to a decoupling of consciousness and behaviour or to partial
zombies, entities which undergo gross changes in consciousness but neither
change their behaviour nor recognise it. See this paper by David Chalmers:

http://consc.net/papers/qualia.html

-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypX2dBmZZgVLLBnukfBbqHeuXBcv7OU4nDLK%3DAXZ62ibHA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Philip Thrift]

On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 4:06:27 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 14:16, Philip Thrift  > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Thus the rejection of panpsychism can be overcome by logical analysis, 
>> historical and cultural reflection, and perhaps even by chemical ingestion. 
>>
>>
>> https://highexistence.com/panpsychism-3-reasons-why-our-world-brimming-sentience/
>>
>> via @PeterSjostedtH 
>>
>>
>> Not quite my panpsychic materialism, but chemistry is involved!
>>
>> Panpsychiam is not consistent with functionalism, whereby if you change a 
>> part of the brain with a functional equivalent the subject notices no 
>> difference. This is because panpsychism is fundamentally substrate 
>> dependent. But there are good reasons for assuming that consciousness is 
>> substrate independent.
>>
>> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
>

What are those?

@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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1126aec6-8413-4896-b1ca-cbe95d379f27%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 14:16, Philip Thrift  wrote:

>
>
> Thus the rejection of panpsychism can be overcome by logical analysis,
> historical and cultural reflection, and perhaps even by chemical ingestion.
>
>
> https://highexistence.com/panpsychism-3-reasons-why-our-world-brimming-sentience/
>
> via @PeterSjostedtH 
>
>
> Not quite my panpsychic materialism, but chemistry is involved!
>
> Panpsychiam is not consistent with functionalism, whereby if you change a
> part of the brain with a functional equivalent the subject notices no
> difference. This is because panpsychism is fundamentally substrate
> dependent. But there are good reasons for assuming that consciousness is
> substrate independent.
>
> --
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypUSoU6ZcbRCRcDgdZudtpb1rtKX0cB-YtiTq0T_K9VjmA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

[Philip Thrift]

On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 1:57:24 PM UTC-5, Cosmin Visan wrote:
>
> Panpsychism is just the position adopted by those still afraid to leave 
> materialism behind and go to idealism.
>

That's basically right, except it seems that it's idealists who are 
"afraid" of matter. :)

@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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/946369c8-75fb-45c2-86f1-a16d35849c08%40googlegroups.com.

Re: Panpsychism: 3 Reasons Why Our World is Brimming with Sentience

['Cosmin Visan' via Everything List]

Panpsychism is just the position adopted by those still afraid to leave 
materialism behind and go to idealism.

-- 
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/45b696f3-1ca9-4104-bbb7-0ef17297a3b8%40googlegroups.com.