Does information need a physical substrate?
-
- Posts: 343
- Joined: March 15th, 2018, 6:15 pm
Does information need a physical substrate?
The physicalists/materialists would certainly answer this question in the affirmative because everything about reality is physical.
In this thread, I am more interested in what the dual aspect theorists have to say.
If we characterize a living being as having both a physicality and a "mental" nature, a subject that has experiential states, what is the status or character of the information that is "in his mind". Does that information have a physical substrate"?
If I believe that the square root of the sum of two sides of a right triangle is the length of the hypotenuse then what do you believe is the "physical substrate" of that abstraction?
In favor of the materialists is the fact that the 2nd law of thermodynamics seems to be validated by it's correspondence to the flow of information. That is, as entropy increases, information is lost!
In favor of the dual aspect position is the fact that mental abstractions do not seem to be subject to the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
In conclusion one cannot ignore "Plato" the father of philosophy. To Plato the world of abstractions created a shadow world of physicality.
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
Also, in The Republic the main aim is to hypothesize some “ideal” society and so “wisdom” is referred to as the best balance overall for everyone in the short and long term - an impossible ideal to achieve knowingly yet one we naturally pursue if we’re sensible enough.
There is no “knowledge” beyond physical conception. This is because we need a physical substrate to abstract from. We do not come from an abstract subtrate and create a physical meaning, and even if we were to play this word game it means nothing more than what you see to be trying to disprove.
Information lost? Generally the current theories seem to be holding up against this idea. So no, you are incorrect to say that “information is lost” and that it is a “fact” (See Claude Shannon, Boltzmann, Hawking, Penrose, Susskind and others for the various ideas about this.)
You also seem to be confusing abstract ideas with set limits to be the underlying reality rather than reflections of some supposed reality. The very limit upon knowledge provides our means of “knowing” - omniscience renders everything meaninglessly obiquitous.
- ThomasHobbes
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
Even the slightest suggestion of a scintilla of a possibility that information does not need a physical presence......
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
See the discussion of the divided line, dialectic, and hypothesis in the Republic. The “way up” begins with images of the imagination and ends with imagining what is known free of hypothesis. It is from this imagined vantage point, an end which is the arche or beginning of the whole, that one “goes down” from what is seen with the mind alone to what is seen with the senses.To Plato the world of abstractions created a shadow world of physicality.
Yes, there is the mythology of unembodied minds, but all we know of unembodied minds are the images created by our embodied imagination. Plato says that philosophy is preparation for death, where the mind is free of the encumbrance of the body, but we are not free of the body. Whatever information is available to us is conveyed to and via embodiment. We can imagine it being otherwise, but we fool ourselves if we imagine what we imagine is something other than something imagined.
- Consul
- Posts: 6136
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
A certain pattern of neural activity in your brain that encodes your belief.
- ThomasHobbes
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
- ThomasHobbes
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
Did you understand the point I was trying to make by the way TH?
- ThomasHobbes
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
-
- Posts: 343
- Joined: March 15th, 2018, 6:15 pm
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
Yes, this is a very good post Fooloso4. You have a very good deep understanding of Plato and I appreciate that. What I would like you to consider is that our current understanding of "physicality" is tarnished by sciences need to empirically verify its character. To this end science only manages to identify 10% of the mass of the universe. My conundrum is that I could agree with the materialist/physicalists that there is physical substrates for all thinking except those substrates are not scientifically recognized legitimate physical constituents. I also think that those unrecognized physical substances coexist within a lower level "mental" framework. The "subject" of our philosopher Tamminen makes this clear.Fooloso4 wrote: ↑October 7th, 2018, 3:36 pm BigBango:
See the discussion of the divided line, dialectic, and hypothesis in the Republic. The “way up” begins with images of the imagination and ends with imagining what is known free of hypothesis. It is from this imagined vantage point, an end which is the arche or beginning of the whole, that one “goes down” from what is seen with the mind alone to what is seen with the senses.To Plato the world of abstractions created a shadow world of physicality.
Yes, there is the mythology of unembodied minds, but all we know of unembodied minds are the images created by our embodied imagination. Plato says that philosophy is preparation for death, where the mind is free of the encumbrance of the body, but we are not free of the body. Whatever information is available to us is conveyed to and via embodiment. We can imagine it being otherwise, but we fool ourselves if we imagine what we imagine is something other than something imagined.
-
- Posts: 343
- Joined: March 15th, 2018, 6:15 pm
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
I guess if we needed a "physical substrate" to abstract from then explain how this initial abstraction evolves in our thinking. Does the "idea" that comes from that abstraction, say E = mc^2 have a physical correlate? What if the abstraction is false? Does not the abstraction exist whether it is physically true or not?Burning ghost wrote: ↑October 7th, 2018, 1:11 am There is no “knowledge” beyond physical conception. This is because we need a physical substrate to abstract from. We do not come from an abstract subtrate and create a physical meaning, and even if we were to play this word game it means nothing more than what you see to be trying to disprove.
- ThomasHobbes
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
It's all very well. But what Plato says is all ancient hoohar. It's just based on his ignorance of the world, purely inventive.BigBango wrote: ↑October 8th, 2018, 10:16 pmYes, this is a very good post Fooloso4. You have a very good deep understanding of Plato and I appreciate that. What I would like you to consider is that our current understanding of "physicality" is tarnished by sciences need to empirically verify its character. To this end science only manages to identify 10% of the mass of the universe. My conundrum is that I could agree with the materialist/physicalists that there is physical substrates for all thinking except those substrates are not scientifically recognized legitimate physical constituents. I also think that those unrecognized physical substances coexist within a lower level "mental" framework. The "subject" of our philosopher Tamminen makes this clear.Fooloso4 wrote: ↑October 7th, 2018, 3:36 pm BigBango:
See the discussion of the divided line, dialectic, and hypothesis in the Republic. The “way up” begins with images of the imagination and ends with imagining what is known free of hypothesis. It is from this imagined vantage point, an end which is the arche or beginning of the whole, that one “goes down” from what is seen with the mind alone to what is seen with the senses.
Yes, there is the mythology of unembodied minds, but all we know of unembodied minds are the images created by our embodied imagination. Plato says that philosophy is preparation for death, where the mind is free of the encumbrance of the body, but we are not free of the body. Whatever information is available to us is conveyed to and via embodiment. We can imagine it being otherwise, but we fool ourselves if we imagine what we imagine is something other than something imagined.
He gives no account of how and why his "forms" can exist. It's nothing more than idle speculation; a theory that does no work.
Truth is just a relation, as is the 'abstraction'. They are both in your head, and therefore based on the physicality of neural matter.I guess if we needed a "physical substrate" to abstract from then explain how this initial abstraction evolves in our thinking. Does the "idea" that comes from that abstraction, say E = mc^2 have a physical correlate? What if the abstraction is false? Does not the abstraction exist whether it is physically true or not?
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Does information need a physical substrate?
That makes no sense. Wrong or not the abstraction is called an abstraction because it has been removed from physical experience not born absent of physical experience. Numbers don’t physically exist yet without physical experience of objects numbers are meaningless (eg. I know he experiential difference between one tree and many trees - I experience the “number” in relation to phenomena not the “number” prior to any phenomena.)BigBango wrote: ↑October 9th, 2018, 1:44 amI guess if we needed a "physical substrate" to abstract from then explain how this initial abstraction evolves in our thinking. Does the "idea" that comes from that abstraction, say E = mc^2 have a physical correlate? What if the abstraction is false? Does not the abstraction exist whether it is physically true or not?Burning ghost wrote: ↑October 7th, 2018, 1:11 am There is no “knowledge” beyond physical conception. This is because we need a physical substrate to abstract from. We do not come from an abstract subtrate and create a physical meaning, and even if we were to play this word game it means nothing more than what you see to be trying to disprove.
2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
2023 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023