--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@...> wrote: (snip) > "Does matter emerge from consciousness?" It's a weird mystical > idea that started in the far east and was an early interpretation > of quantum mechanics. I can't see how the statement makes sense, > it seems to contradict everything we know about evolution both > of life and the universe itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism "The Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine."--Sir James Jeans, British physicist, astronomer, and mathematician "The mind-stuff of the world is, of course, something more general than our individual conscious minds . The mind-stuff is not spread in space and time; these are part of the cyclic scheme ultimately derived out of it . It is necessary to keep reminding ourselves that all knowledge of our environment from which the world of physics is constructed, has entered in the form of messages transmitted along the nerves to the seat of consciousness . Consciousness is not sharply defined, but fades into subconsciousness; and beyond that we must postulate something indefinite but yet continuous with our mental nature . It is difficult for the matter-of-fact physicist to accept the view that the substratum of everything is of mental character. But no one can deny that mind is the first and most direct thing in our experience, and all else is remote inference."--Sir Arthur Eddington, British astrophysicist > I don't see how you can keep the second law of thermodynamics if everything > is from the mind, unless god doesn't care about his creation after all. > Basically, cosmic consciousness must be falling > apart too just like everything else. Like all quantum mystical > ideas it complicates things unnecessarily. It helps sell yagyas > though but I don't like the idea of perpetuating ancient religions with the > language of science especially when it isn't very good science. Plato, Kant, Hegel, Fichte, Schelling, Schopenhauer, Leibniz, Berkeley, et al. Idealism is primarily philosophy, not religion. It really won't do to just dismiss the kinds of ideas you don't like as "religious." > I've been reading about free will (or the lack of it) all day, > some interesting experiments can be done to demonstrate that > your brain makes a measurable decision to act up to a second > before you "decide" to do something. There are scientific reasons to question the results of these studies. > Consciousness appears to be last in a chain of > neurophysiological events. Not sure how that would > give it primacy over everything else. And you're defining consciousness very narrowly here. This is all a far more sophisticated discussion than you imagine. > "Does consciousness emerge from matter?" That's more like it, > it fits in with observations and doesn't require gods, whether > quantum or biblical. There is even a fabulous structure in our > heads that can be measured to be displaying consciousness and > having thoughts. Give me the most obvious explanation every > time.
