> On 1 Jun 2018, at 19:41, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > > > > On 6/1/2018 12:15 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> On 31 May 2018 at 19:57, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: >>> >>> On 5/31/2018 2:06 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >>>> >>>> You're a bit naughty Brent. You sometimes use this maneuver of >>>> nonchalantly listing something that is being discussed -- but that you >>>> don't like -- along with something else that is obviously outdated or >>>> silly. >>> >>> It's not that I "don't like" primary matter, it's that I think it's an >>> invented term that nobody actually postulates. >> >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism#Overview : >> >> "To idealists, spirit or mind or the objects of mind (ideas) are >> primary, and matter secondary. To materialists, matter is primary, and >> mind or spirit or ideas are secondary, the product of matter acting >> upon matter." > > I concede the point. There are many who consider that matter can explain > mind, so in the Materialism vs Idealism debate they are taking matter as > prior, and one may infer, as primary. But the few who actually think about > the ontology of "matter", like Wheeler, Hawking, Tegmark,...do not just > postulate some "primary matter”
Tegmark tends to not postulate it at all. (But his approach still miss the mind-body problem, and he is unclear on it, although his more recent taking into account of computation and “simulation argument” (step 6) make it closer to computationalism. > and in fact ask questions like, "What makes the equations fly." They do not > even insist that there is an ur-stuff that is matter. Which was my point > that if there is an ur-stuff then the ur-stuff makes both mind and matter and > whatever else so there's little point in calling is either matter or mind. > However, that's not a reason to avoid trying to produce mind from matter, as > in AI. And one is free to try to produce matter from mind. Of course. But when we assume mechanism, we are obliged to explain matter appearance from a theory of mind. Physics becomes a branch of psychology or theology. Theology is better, because it separate what is transcendent, what is non provable and true, from what is justifiable. Of course, everybody has the right to not be interested in the mind-body problem, but we have to stop the habit to confuse “non interesting for me”, with “false” or “inconsistent” or “senseless”, or “not interesting for everybody”, … Bruno > > Brent > > Brent > >> >>> I'd like to see Bruno >>> actually quote some well known philosophers or scientist using the term. >> Materialism vs. Idealism is one of the oldest philosophical debates, >> and I am 100% sure you know that. The uber-mainstream wikipedia >> defines materialism as a belief in that matter is primary. >> >>> I >>> think he reads people like Dennett or Churchland who defend the possibility >>> of a physical explanation of consciousness and, since he thinks >>> consciousness is more fundamental than physics, he wants to accuse them of >>> believing in "primary matter". >> Well, they do -- exactly on the terms described in the Wikipedia >> article above. I refer to Wikipedia not because it is an authoritative >> source (it is not, of course), but because it is so mainstream -- as >> evidence against your claim that this is all something Bruno dreamed >> up. >> >> Telmo. >> >>>> "Oh you think that quantum mechanics and consciousness might be >>>> connected? How are those Deepak Chopra teachings working for you?" >>>> etc... >>>> >>>> So, forgetting the elan vitale, I would like you to make you position >>>> more precise. Do you think that tax money should only be applied to >>>> research that is obviously and immediately useful? >>> >>> Of course not. >>> >>>> Or are you ok with >>>> trusting tenured academics and peer-review to decide what gets funded? >>>> In the second case, I guess we must all have some tolerance for ideas >>>> that we don't agree with, right? >>> >>> Right. >>> >>> >>> Brent >>> >>> -- >>> 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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. >>> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
