Other than via physical instantiation (re: Boltzmann, Turing, Shannon, Von Neumann et al), how can we differentiate signals from noise? — 180 Proof
If "it's all noise" and "all" includes "minds" and it is "mind" that "attaches meaning to a bit of noise and calls it a signal", then, in effect what you're saying is, noise generates signals from noise.It's all noise until a mind comes along and attaches meaning to a bit of noise and calls it a signal. — RogueAI
's assertion was intentionally ridiculous, because he's trying to make your position sound absurd. His vigorous defense of Orthodox Materialism, attacks what he perceives as heretical Immaterialism (or spiritualism, or idealism). To him, Mind is a Myth or Illusion. So any reference to such phantoms is only so much noise.what you're saying is, noise generates signals from noise. — 180 Proof
Do you think mind=noise??? — RogueAI
Strawman. Stop your onanistic bs, G. :lol:His vigorous defense of Orthodox Materialism ... To him, Mind is a Myth ... he mostly attacks other beliefs, but doesn't make his own position clear. — Gnomon
Minding is what highly adaptive, fully-functional, and sufficiently complex CNS-brains do. — 180 Proof
Language, Mr. Proof. Watch your language! There are sensitive immaterial minds on this forum. :grin:Strawman. Stop your onanistic bs, G. :lol: — 180 Proof
Is that your final answer to the question of Immaterialism? :smile: — Gnomon
No. Once again you miss the point, because you can't put your physical finger on a Function. The target is invisible to the eye, but knowable to a rational Mind. Do you have one of those spooky non-things? Or are you ipso facto dis-enminded?↪Gnomon
"Immaterialism" as in e.g. dis-embodied minds? :eyes: Res ipsa loquitur. — 180 Proof
The philosophical question is not where Mind resides, but what is Mind? If it's not a material object, then it's immaterial. Many of the posts on this thread are talking past each other. When the topic is about "immaterialism" it's referring to Qualia, not Quanta. Qualia, as subjective patterns, can reside in a variety of material objects. Pattern recognition occurs, not in a Brain, but in a Mind. The "observer" is not a homunculus. Qualia is "what it feels like" to observe a pattern of incoming information.In what else than matter can the mind reside? — Cornwell1
The philosophical question is not where Mind resides, but what is Mind? If it's not a material object, then it's immaterial — Gnomon
Of course, on the macro level of reality, those patterns are always associated with physical things. But on the quantum scale that common-sense association breaks down. — Gnomon
The link in my last post will give you an overview of what's special enough about Quantum physics to call it a "Paradigm Shift". That's why physicists now distinguish between the Classical physics of Newton, and the Quantum physics of the 20th century. It was the radical new worldview of non-local acausal physics that inspired Thomas Kuhn to coin a novel phrase. What used to be Common Sense becomes marginalized in the new era. For example, Matter is now defined by ideal mathematical Points instead of real material Atoms. :smile:I'm not sure what's so special about the quantum scale. — Cornwell1
Matter is now defined by ideal mathematical Points — Gnomon
Qualia is "what it feels like" to observe a pattern of incoming information.
If there is an Inside and an Outside to existence, then physicalism holds (or at least dualism does). It doesn't matter what form the Outside takes - whether it be atoms, or points, or the mind of God. These are just different names for a thing we can never truly know, but acknowledge must be. The only alternative is solipsism. — Real Gone Cat
Another false dichotomy – occupational hazard of dualism ("BothAnd" :roll:), no doubt.If it's not a material object, then it's immaterial. — Gnomon
Your narrow usage, G; I prefer Berkeley's much broader concept of "immaterialism" to which I referred previously."Immaterialism" refers to the mental functions of embodied brains. — Gnomon
The mind of God does not reside in our universe and points neither.
"Immaterialism" refers to the mental functions of embodied brains.
You do not actually think those are valid alternatives — Real Gone Cat
And I caution my philosophy-minded friends to be careful invoking quantum physics. Its an abstraction (i.e., mind-generated construct) — Real Gone Cat
What do you mean by "those"? God's mind and point particles?
Why can't it be a description of material reality?
Are you arguing just to be contrary? — Real Gone Cat
Of course those. They are the only two you mention. And subsequently dismiss. So list what explanations you do find compelling. — Real Gone Cat
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.