You can measure the intensity of a magnetic field, though. — Olivier5
Configuration of neurons are brain states, but changes in neuron configurations are mental states? — Mww
Yeah, pretty much. Up/down, right/left, right/wrong, ad infinitum. Physical/non-physical. In the human cognitive system, for any possible conception, the negation of it is given immediately. — Mww
Isn’t a single Feynman diagram depicting the interaction of one electron with one positron, or the interaction of two electrons, exact? In what way is it not? — Mww
Physical reality is what we (minds) make of what we perceive. — Olivier5
Conclusion: Thoughts are neither matter nor energy. — TheMadFool
Here is why I think you have reached a false conclusion. You did not consider that thoughts are always inseparable from the neurons/brain matter that contain them. By observation they always go together. Bipartite and irreducible. Neurons are matter so your argument is not complete in its analysis. — Mark Nyquist
It is our common reality: we know of the world through our senses.That's not physical reality, that's solipsism. Physical reality is the causes of our perceptions. Or do you mean physical theory is what we make of what we perceive? — Kenosha Kid
the very definition of 'physical' in regular English is 'empirical, confirmed by the senses', — Olivier5
You of course define 'physical' in a different manner, which appears to include ideas. — Olivier5
the obvious logical contradiction of 'strong materialism' (=the idea that ideas don't exist). — Olivier5
Okay so you don't know how it's done. — Olivier5
Prove that materialism contradicts itself" ... if, of course, "you can". — 180 Proof
You of course define 'physical' in a different manner, which appears to include ideas. If ideas are considered physical, or material, then I have no problem with such a 'weak materialism'. It solves the obvious logical contradiction of 'strong materialism' (=the idea that ideas don't exist). — Olivier5
Not worth my time. Have a good one. — 180 Proof
We're talking ideas in someone's [?], right? It doesn't permit redness to exist objectively as a perfect form outside of brains as an idealist might have it. But yes clearly my ideas exist in some way: I can convey that without any understanding of what they fundamentally are. — Kenosha Kid
Configuration of neurons are brain states, but changes in neuron configurations are mental states?
— Mww
Mental process, not mental state. — Kenosha Kid
It's convenient to think of them as physical processes, but in fact they're just terms in an infinite sum that describes a physical process. — Kenosha Kid
Ya know what? I’d like to take a survey, of people in general, after a quick perusal of this:
https://web2.ph.utexas.edu/~vadim/Classes/2012f/vertex.pdf
.....followed by a quick perusal of this:
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/4280
.....with the survey question being, which one of these is the least useless, with respect to a theoretical description of goings-on between the ears of the human rational animal. — Mww
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.