|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,385 Year: 3,642/9,624 Month: 513/974 Week: 126/276 Day: 23/31 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: At what point should we look for a non-materialistic explanation? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
The problem I have with this premise is that initial conditions can never be the same. Why not?
So this in itself would prevent a duplicate world. But we just created a world with all the same physical properties. What's preventing this from happening?
But given that this world somehow comes to be identical I would say it would be identical. Souls and emotions and everything else. It is only physically identical, not 'spiritually' identical. Souls don't need to be replicated (and in fact explicitly aren't). Emotions are replicated in so far as their physical basis is replicated.
Would the iron molecules in a indviduals would be the same? They would have all the same physical properties. But they wouldn't necessarily be the same molecules.
Would spontanenous mutations in genes be the same? Yep - that's a physically based thing.
Would these two worlds evolve on every level of physics end up the same? Yes.
I can not see how. Not knowing how isn't material (heh). All that matters is that we consider such a universe.
Just one non functioning microtubual in a sperms flagellum would wipe out Hitlers whole family line. But that would only happen if the physical properties of the universe are different, say the physicalists. And further - we could just create the new universe to be physically identical to the present one so we don't need to worry about history yet. Even if we stipulate that certain events will play out differently due to some inherent probabilistic effect which is not 'seeded' by the a physical property * - the physicalist would argue that at the moment the two universes have identical physical properties - there are no differences between them.
I do not know what the soul is. No, but the only necessary definition is that it is non-physical. It is a dualist's concept of a soul.
I still think the mind is non physical. The mind may well be 'non physical' in one sense, but the physicalist argues that the mind is an emergent property of the brain (the mind is what the brain does). It 'non physical' in the same sense that running is non physical. You can't point to running, it doesn't exist as a noun. The mind, the the physicalist might say, is not a noun, but a verb. However, you take away my legs (physical things) and I lose the ability to run (in the sense of a certain kind of leg based locomotion). Take away the brain, and I lose the ability to think. Do you think we should concentrate our research into consciousness surrounding the non-physical? Or have we not reached that point yet? * Cavediver for example stresses that quantum physics is still deterministic - and it could be that the identical physical universe would have every probabilistic outcome come out the same. The truth of this matter isn't actually important to the point though, and I raise it merely as a point of interest. Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
.
The following book, which I have read, talks about the connection between QM and consciousness. Quantum Enigma Here is one quote from the book. Other interpretations of quantum theory today compete with the Copenhagen interpretation — and with each other. Interpreting what quantum mechanics is telling us has become a contentious field. But we'll see that every interpretation encounters consciousness. With these interpretations of the meaning of quantum mechanics, we come to the boundary of the physics discipline, a place beyond which the expertise of the physicist is not uniquely relevant. Science is supposed to follow where the evidence leads and according to these guys the evidence leads to a consciousness that isn't solely physical. I don't pretend to have the knowledge to defend the following quote but I think it's pertinent to the discussion. It comes from the Penrose-Hameroff site
Quantum Consciousness It seems that these guys at least believe that science can have something to say about the spiritual.
quote: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4736 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
Good morning ∅
psuedo science, probably. But still intriguing. What I find intriguing about this kind of research is the why of it. What gave these guy the idea that thinking good thoughts at water would produce more ascetically pleasing crystals? Usually an experiment is an attempt to confirm a prediction demanded by an hypothesis. What was their hypothesis that lead them down this trail? And what kind of indicator is "ascetically pleasing"? Why not something objective like rate of growth or symmetry? Is it because objective criteria are harder to fudge? And it's the Institute for Noetic Sciences, for Pete's sake. I'm sure that the findings will be confirmed any day now by Barry and Brad Klinge in the Ghost Lab. The world breaks everyone, and afterward many are strong at the broken places. But those it cannot break, it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you are none of these, you can be sure that it will kill you too, but there will be no special hurry. Ernest Hemingway
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1524 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Greetings Modulous, (btw, I dig bands from Manchester and enjoy that show Shameless
The mind, the the physicalist might say, is not a noun, but a verb. Well you cant run without legs, But you can in dreams. I believe it is both. Like almost everything in nature a combination of properties. Positive & Negative, Male & Female, Matter & anti-matter, Deterministic & non Deterministic, Physical & non-physical. As far as the Universe being deterministic goes I believe it is. To a point. http://sulcus.berkeley.edu/wjf/BD.Stochastic.chaos.name.pdfhttp://arxiv.org/PS_cache/chao-dyn/pdf/9306/9306005v1.pdf http://www.physics.mcgill.ca/...vejoy/neweprint/stochall.pdf I believe we should not abandon the notion of non-physical until we have a deeper understanding.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
1.6 writes: I would rather be ignorant in wonder than certain of my nihlism. I pity your attitude to life. There is no need to be nihilistic. Certainty is a fools pursuit. And Basking in ignorance remains far from wonderous. No mater how pretttily you might phrase it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1524 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Greetings Lyx2NO!
What I find intriguing about this kind of research is the why of it. The why of it is that Dr. Randi stated he would pay a million dollars to the author if he could provide evidence of this though a double blind independant study. They declined, and then came up with there own study.
What gave these guy the idea that thinking good thoughts at water would produce more ascetically pleasing crystals? Usually an experiment is an attempt to confirm a prediction demanded by an hypothesis. What was their hypothesis that lead them down this trail? A better question I think is why would something subjective as asthetics or beauty of the crystals be used as a basis for determinining positive thoughts verses negative. This is in itself bias and anthropomophizing to happy & good thoughts= pretty crystals compared to; mean & mad thought = ugly crystals.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1524 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Hi Straggler,
I pity your attitude to life. I have never had anyone tell me that before.I am not sure how to respond. I guess I should re-examine my life and figure out where I went wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
1.6 writes: I guess I should re-examine my life and figure out where I went wrong. Well I would advise against starting from the base assumption that you went "wrong" as such. That seems a little nihilistic for my tastes. More re-examine your life and see if you are where you want to be I guess. But that aside it sounds like a fun quest and one that we should all contemplate from time to time. Enjoy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4736 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
The why of it is that Dr. Randi stated he would pay a million dollars to the author if he could provide evidence of this though a double blind independant study. This entirely misses the point. Why did they think that thinking good thoughts at water would produce more ascetically pleasing crystals? Did they just select something out of the blue as my header suggests, or did they have a hypothesis that predicted that thinking good thoughts at water would produce more ascetically pleasing crystals? What would that hypothesis be?
A better question I think is why would something subjective as asthetics or beauty of the crystals be used as a basis for determinining positive thoughts verses negative. A man is blindly guessing at what is behind curtain #1: "Is it a red hat?""No." "Is it a blue hat?" "No." "Is it a Green hat?" "No." "Is it a Black hat?" "No." "Is it a Yellow hat?" "No." "Is it What is the sense of randomly guessing the details of an object before confirming the gross character of the object? Getting back to the topic: How do you reconcile:
I do not believe in magic other than it's ability to confound. with:
I believe we should not abandon the notion of non-physical until we have a deeper understanding. Eliminating the physical causes leaves us with magical causes. The world breaks everyone, and afterward many are strong at the broken places. But those it cannot break, it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you are none of these, you can be sure that it will kill you too, but there will be no special hurry. Ernest Hemingway
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Well you cant run without legs, But you can in dreams. I'm not sure what your point is.
I believe it is both. I had picked up on that. Do you think that we have reached a point in consciousness studies where we should concentrate on non-physical explanations?
I believe we should not abandon the notion of non-physical until we have a deeper understanding. I believe we should not investigate the notions of the non-physical until a reason to do so presents itself. Do you think there exists a reason to do so? I'm not 'abandoning' the non-physical in the sense of simply refusing to consider it - I just don't see what use considering such explanations has. We've been exploring them for our whole history but it seems that only when we exclude them and investigate the physical alone that we actually make interesting advancements in understanding and technology.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
PaulK writes: Aside from the fact that the whole TV idea is an incredibly dubious interpretation, there is still no requirement in Islam to actually worship a TV picture, a TV or anything that could be shown on a TV. Just the opposite. In other words this scenario is NOT plausible and can be entirely attributed to your imagination. Nothing supernatural is required to "explain" it at all. Your strawman argument does not address my postion. I did not allege that there was in place now any Islamic requirement to worship and image on TV. My position is that the tech is advancing and it is feasible that given the power and tech, which appears to be emerging this could soon be implemented. It is a fact that in some totalitarien cultures kneeling and praying towards Mecca is either required or urged. Edited by AdminModulous, : fixed quote tag BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1524 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Magic is unexplained phenomenon that confounds until the trick is learned. Magic is entertainment.
Intuition, Dreams, conciousness,language, ideas are examples of how the non physical can influence and direct our decisions. I mentioned that the forces of nature are non physical and was told that they are considered physical. Even though they are not composed of matter or have mass. I am not sure what is being asked. Is your point that there is nothing in the universe that can be called non physical? Therefore the notion should be dispensed with ouright? I believe there is more to the universe than the sum of its parts.Just as I believe there is more to a human being than the sum of its parts. I know, I know, click copy quote and destroy. Why would anyone think such things. Call me a romantic. Edited by 1.61803, : added language.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1524 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Greetings Modulus,
I am not involved in neuro research. I do happen to work in the research field for pharmaceutical companies as well as respiratory medicine. I have seen over the course of several years the research and FDA approval and marketing of monoclonal medications for respiratory disease. If someone told me fifteen years ago such a thing was possible I would have scoffed. We are now treating asthma on a level far up the immunological inflammatory cascade before the damages of cytokines take place. I say this because all research fields ar always in flux.You may yourself be doing research. Some say what a difference a day makes is an understatement. Serendipity and luck sometimes really means the difference in breakthroughs. Some say the immune system may be the first consciousness of an organism. Now that sounds far out and ridiculous. It may be rubbish. Or maybe ten years from now someone may link the immune system with consciousness. Today the academics are even talking about how the fluctuations of adrenergics in autonomic nervous system could be responsible for a whole host of disease previously thought to be isolated as individual disorders. I do agree with you though in that I do not see how science could ever glean knowledge from the unknowable. Edited by 1.61803, : spelling,grammer
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4736 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
Magic is unexplained phenomenon that confounds until the trick is learned. Magic is entertainment. I'd hoped we'd gotten past equivocation. If there is a coin hidden behind the kids ear, or Scotty beams the quarter behind the kids ear, for the magician to remove, we have a magic trick. If a genie pops the quarter behind the kids ear using no known or unknown forces of nature (having cause and effect relationships) we have magic. It is the latter that is of interest.
Intuition, Dreams, conciousness,language, ideas are examples of how the non physical can influence and direct our decisions. Labeling an idea as non-physical is trivial. None of the above is example of what is meant by non-physical in this discussion. An idea generated by a brain, the brain then using the idea as impetus to act through the body has no unnatural (having no cause and effect relationships) elements. Everything one does has a non-materialistic explanation in that case.
Is your point that there is nothing in the universe that can be called non physical? Yes.
Therefore the notion should be dispensed with ouright? The question is "can it?". I think it can with a certainty of 99.999999999%. Others, however, believe anything they personally don't understand intuitively is caused by unnatural forces. So, At what point should we look for a non-materialistic explanation?
I believe there is more to the universe than the sum of its parts. Maybe.
there is more to a human being than the sum of its parts. Clearly. The world breaks everyone, and afterward many are strong at the broken places. But those it cannot break, it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you are none of these, you can be sure that it will kill you too, but there will be no special hurry. Ernest Hemingway
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: As usual you are misrepresenting the facts. In Message 85 you asserted.
The penalty of refusal to worship the image will be punishable by death, as per Shariah Islamic law. Many who refuse will be beheaded as per Revelation 20 and Islamic tradition.
You explicitly said that Islam would demand worship of the image, and you did not explicitly retract it.
quote: And, of course, your NEW position has nothing to do with Biblical prophecy - which IS about worshipping an image, specifically the image of the Beast. Revelation 13:15
...it was given to him to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast would even speak and cause as many as do not worship the image of the beast to be killed.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024