Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ...
6
7
8
9
LastLast
  1. #141
    People also thought we would never know where life came from. Everything will be answered with time.

  2. #142
    Quote Originally Posted by AryuFate View Post
    People also thought we would never know where life came from. Everything will be answered with time.
    Beliefs are wonderful things to have.

  3. #143
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    59,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    It depends on the interpretation of quantum mechanics, there are some that link observations (or wave-function collapse) to consciousness.

    I'm not saying that they are right - or even that right or wrong are applicable to them, merely that those interpretations exist.
    That's a relationship the other way; I wasn't speaking about the possible quantum component to consciousness, just that "observation" in the sense it's meant in quantum physics does not require a conscious observer.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    A schizophrenic doesn't have the opinion that he hears voices. He hears those voices. In his mind, that is an absolute truth. The fact that the voices are not real does not change that truth for him.
    They don't hear those voices. The voices do not exist. Their impression of voices is a symptom, a misfiring of their mental processes.

    You are, again, completely conflating subjective opinion and objective reality. Worse, your approach, presented to a schizophrenic, would be damaging to their mental health because of how egregiously you're misrepresenting things; recognition that the hallucinations aren't real, aren't "true", is a critical component to managing their health.

  4. #144
    Quote Originally Posted by ranzino View Post
    curiousity is a driving force since ancient times and "i dont know" is not a weakness.
    "I don't know" compels further research.

    "God works in mysterious ways" is absolutely unacceptable as an excuse.

  5. #145
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    Beliefs are wonderful things to have.


    If you actually believe science won’t answer things in all the time it has, you are delusional. We are just a tiny era in the large history of the universe.

  6. #146
    Epic!
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Portland, OR - USA
    Posts
    1,626
    Quote Originally Posted by AryuFate View Post
    If you actually believe science won’t answer things in all the time it has, you are delusional. We are just a tiny era in the large history of the universe.
    There is a very good chance we'll all be dead before we answer everything. Heck, even the whole of the universe may be dead by the time it gets close
    Quote Originally Posted by Sulla View Post
    Senator Moore will be sitting in that seat and I hope it burns you to your core.
    Quote Originally Posted by Knadra View Post
    Trump did it so it's good. I put my faith in a strong political figure because I lack self-esteem and feel threatened by a changing world. Whoever stands against him is bad because I do not understand their arguments and I have a simple tribalistic mindset created through the consumption of right-wing media.

  7. #147
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    That's a relationship the other way; I wasn't speaking about the possible quantum component to consciousness, just that "observation" in the sense it's meant in quantum physics does not require a conscious observer.
    Neither was I talking about that.

    The link in those interpretations go the same way, i.e. a conscious observer is required for the wave form collapse.

    So, not Penrose's idea of micro-tubules, but von Neumann–Wigner's idea. I'm not saying that any of those ideas are correct - merely that they exist.

  8. #148
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaderas View Post
    There is a very good chance we'll all be dead before we answer everything. Heck, even the whole of the universe may be dead by the time it gets close
    Given the speed at which we are progressing, I’d say it is a very small chance.

  9. #149
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    I agree with you (as did Jung, and other psychologists) but you will not get through to Endus, he is firmly stuck in a one sided view of reality. Objective reality Trumps all for him, and other people that have science as their highest axiom (what Jung would call a God).
    In that sense, Endus is right. Reality has only one side.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sicari View Post
    We're gonna Godwin so much you might even get tired of Godwinning

  10. #150
    Merely a Setback Connal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    29,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    In that sense, Endus is right. Reality has only one side.
    We are part of reality, and are subjective, that is the "other" side of reality.
    Vocatus atque non vocatus, deus aderit.

  11. #151
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    59,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    We are part of reality, and are subjective, that is the "other" side of reality.
    Yes, we are part of "reality".

    No, we are not "subjective". We're as objectively determinable as anything else.

    That we can have subjective opinions does not mean any of those opinions are "real", other than in the sense that they describe your opinions. "I don't like fish" doesn't have any meaning or truth to it other than "I don't like fish". It doesn't mean fish isn't likeable, or that anyone else that does like fish is "wrong". It isn't a "truth", it's just a subjective preference this one individual has. That I have that preference is "true", but that preference itself is not in any respect "true".

  12. #152
    Epic!
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Portland, OR - USA
    Posts
    1,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Yes, we are part of "reality".

    No, we are not "subjective". We're as objectively determinable as anything else.

    That we can have subjective opinions does not mean any of those opinions are "real", other than in the sense that they describe your opinions. "I don't like fish" doesn't have any meaning or truth to it other than "I don't like fish". It doesn't mean fish isn't likeable, or that anyone else that does like fish is "wrong". It isn't a "truth", it's just a subjective preference this one individual has. That I have that preference is "true", but that preference itself is not in any respect "true".
    Maybe I'm missing your point here, but how are we "objectively determinable"?

    How do I know you aren't a hallucination, a deception, a fabrication akin to what a schizophrenic would experience... all created by my mind (or possibly another entity with intent to deceive me). What tools are in place that I could entrust that couldn't just be part of an elaborate fabrication themselves?

    Honest question here, but I apologize beforehand if I'm completely missing the intent of your statement though.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sulla View Post
    Senator Moore will be sitting in that seat and I hope it burns you to your core.
    Quote Originally Posted by Knadra View Post
    Trump did it so it's good. I put my faith in a strong political figure because I lack self-esteem and feel threatened by a changing world. Whoever stands against him is bad because I do not understand their arguments and I have a simple tribalistic mindset created through the consumption of right-wing media.

  13. #153
    Merely a Setback Connal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    29,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Yes, we are part of "reality".

    No, we are not "subjective". We're as objectively determinable as anything else.

    That we can have subjective opinions does not mean any of those opinions are "real", other than in the sense that they describe your opinions. "I don't like fish" doesn't have any meaning or truth to it other than "I don't like fish". It doesn't mean fish isn't likeable, or that anyone else that does like fish is "wrong". It isn't a "truth", it's just a subjective preference this one individual has. That I have that preference is "true", but that preference itself is not in any respect "true".
    Yes, we are subjective, our minds create a reality of our own, and we subjectively act out our own reality. It usually matches other people's realites, but not always.
    Vocatus atque non vocatus, deus aderit.

  14. #154
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    That's a relationship the other way; I wasn't speaking about the possible quantum component to consciousness, just that "observation" in the sense it's meant in quantum physics does not require a conscious observer.

    - - - Updated - - -



    They don't hear those voices. The voices do not exist. Their impression of voices is a symptom, a misfiring of their mental processes.

    You are, again, completely conflating subjective opinion and objective reality. Worse, your approach, presented to a schizophrenic, would be damaging to their mental health because of how egregiously you're misrepresenting things; recognition that the hallucinations aren't real, aren't "true", is a critical component to managing their health.
    You're right the voices don't exist.

    You're wrong though, because they do hear them.

    You don't treat a schizophrenic by telling them they don't hear voices. You treat them by telling them the voices aren't real.

    That's why i separate Fact from Truth. The Truth is they hear voices. The Facts are that they have a chemical imbalance in their brain causing them to hallucinate.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sicari View Post
    We're gonna Godwin so much you might even get tired of Godwinning

  15. #155
    Merely a Setback Connal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    29,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    You're right the voices don't exist.

    You're wrong though, because they do hear them.

    You don't treat a schizophrenic by telling them they don't hear voices. You treat them by telling them the voices aren't real.

    That's why i separate Fact from Truth. The Truth is they hear voices. The Facts are that they have a chemical imbalance in their brain causing them to hallucinate.
    We all hallucinate reality. They are hallucinating something extra that the other people do not see due to a neural network that is working differently.

    ‘We’re All Hallucinating All of the Time’
    https://www.theatlantic.com/video/in...ce-perception/

    Many people assume that they perceive the world as it actually is—as if eyes and ears were windows that allow us to access an objective reality. But perception is not an accurate reflection of an externally existing world.

    “In fact,” the neuroscientist Anil Seth says, “perception and hallucination have a lot in common. You could say that we’re all hallucinating all of the time, and when we agree about our hallucinations, that’s what we call reality.”
    Vocatus atque non vocatus, deus aderit.

  16. #156
    The question of whether one can see reality as it really is, is a philosophical one to begin with.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaderas View Post
    Maybe I'm missing your point here, but how are we "objectively determinable"?

    How do I know you aren't a hallucination, a deception, a fabrication akin to what a schizophrenic would experience... all created by my mind (or possibly another entity with intent to deceive me). What tools are in place that I could entrust that couldn't just be part of an elaborate fabrication themselves?

    Honest question here, but I apologize beforehand if I'm completely missing the intent of your statement though.
    I think the point is there's no strange mystery about humans - the mystery is about reality to begin with, and humans are just one part of reality.

  17. #157
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    We all hallucinate reality. They are hallucinating something extra that the other people do not see due to a neural network that is working differently.

    ‘We’re All Hallucinating All of the Time’
    https://www.theatlantic.com/video/in...ce-perception/
    Perception of reality does not change reality.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sicari View Post
    We're gonna Godwin so much you might even get tired of Godwinning

  18. #158
    Don't know if you count mathematics as science or not, but there are a few open questions there that I doubt we will ever truly find the answer to. The Riemann hypothesis or Navier-Stokes equations come to mind.

  19. #159
    Merely a Setback Connal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    29,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    Perception of reality does not change reality.
    Reality as we see it is not "reality". Perception does not change, but what we see is not the "full" reality. It is a filtered one.



    To put this in a different way. Your browser you are typing this message in, is not the "reality" of how the computer works, it is an abstraction.
    Vocatus atque non vocatus, deus aderit.

  20. #160
    The Insane PC2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    15,992
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    Neither was I talking about that.

    The link in those interpretations go the same way, i.e. a conscious observer is required for the wave form collapse.

    So, not Penrose's idea of micro-tubules, but von Neumann–Wigner's idea. I'm not saying that any of those ideas are correct - merely that they exist.
    The conscious collapse interpretations are too convoluted. They add a lot of unnecessary complexity. Good theories provide the simplest explanation that accounts for a phenomina. Everettian MWI is by far the most mathematically succinct. Also it's the only one that explains why evolutionary variation and selection emerged at a higher level of abstraction, and how meme generation and falsification integrates with scientific progression. Anthropic selection also explains why we have our physical constants. But ultimately it will require quantum gravity to confirm which interpretation best integrates with GTR.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •