> On 9 Aug 2019, at 14:03, Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 8:19 PM Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be > <mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> wrote: > > Contra-lucid dreams are impossible. Bruce could still claim that all dreams > are lucid, (like day-dreams) and this corroborates his statement that he > knows when he is awake, which indeed presupposes a non digital-mechanist > theory of mind. > > Somehow, Bruce invoke a “mystical” relations between mind and matter. He is > coherent with his non mechanist presupposition and his believe in a primitive > irreducible physical reality, > > I am glad that you understand that I am doing physics, and that I am > expounding it correctly.
Of course. If you say so. > If this exposition disagrees with your "mechanism", then surely that shows > "mechanism" to be false. After all, you claim that you test your theory by > its agreement or not with standard physics. Only the collapse of the we packet would be a problem for mechanism. > > obeying some wave packet reduction. He is close to Stapp and Wigner where > eventually consciousness is responsible for the wave packet reduction. > > No, I don't believe that consciousness reduces the wave packet. Decoherence > does a perfectly good job of that. Once there is no collapse, decoherence is just self-entanglement. We can forget the other “world” because we cannot access them, FAPP, but not FMP (For Metaphysical Purpose). Our problem is that you talk physics, but sometimes seem to infer metaphysical proposition, like the existence of a world, or the inexistence of some worlds. My point is that with mechanism, a large part of the metaphysics can be tested experimentally. We can do metaphysics/theology with the scientific attitude (modesty) and method. Unlike Clark, your metaphysical position is coherent: you seem to believe in atome absolute external physical reality, and in the falsity of mechanism. That works very well together. But my working hypothesis is Descartes Mechanism (modernised through Turing & Co.) and the consequence is that Plato works in that setting, and Aristotle (materialism) does not. Then, for those willing to take QM at face value, without collapse, we do get a confirmation of the startling consequences of (digital) Mechanism. Bruno > > Bruce > > -- > 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 > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLR7z30n8tJ4q%2BKACKjxvg2uq9GqyRqM2uY4Qxth6uEi%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLR7z30n8tJ4q%2BKACKjxvg2uq9GqyRqM2uY4Qxth6uEi%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- 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/A26D893C-0FE8-451E-8E7D-56E015048928%40ulb.ac.be.
