Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
Locked
Atla
Posts: 1153
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 11th, 2020, 10:53 am

Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 10:51 am
Or alternatively you can treat information as abstract, and say that everything is 'made of' information, but then there's no room for the matter concept.
I mean: alternatively you can treat information as concrete
really can't get used to the lack of an edit function sry

User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 748
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by chewybrian » January 11th, 2020, 10:53 am

Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 9:45 am
chewybrian wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 7:18 am


Is the English language a part of your physical being? Were you born with the English language inside you? I think, rather, you were born with an ability to understand ideas, and the English language is one way of encoding ideas, and encouraging you to have an idea in your head similar to the idea in the head of the speaker or writer. You could just as easily have learned French or some other language, just as the computer could run on different software. But the language, for you, and the software, for the computer, are not physical elements built in.

If the computer had its memory wiped out, windows would go away with it, though you might have windows stored separately on discs or something. Similarly, if all humans died today, the English language would die with them, though it may remain stored in dictionaries or other means. In either case, the hardware of the computer could still be present, and your 'hardware', your dead body, may still be present, but the software is not part of that hardware. Software is only information, which the hardware stores, just as language is information which we store.
No, you are just making a similar reification fallacy with language, and then you draw a parallel with software.
Right back at you.

You have attributed a material existence to the ideas that are the essence of the software, and wish to pretend those ideas exist only in that material form, in the atoms and molecules inside the computer. But, the software entered into the computer is nothing if not encoding of ideas that existed in the mind of the man who wrote them. No idea ever enters the computer, but a keystroke or a reading of a spot on a disc is the physical reflection of the non-physical ideas. Such ideas have no material existence, and I am the one who is here trying to say they do not. Yet, I do not deny their existence, and the impact of ideas upon material things. They are real, yet not material--spooky, huh?

Restricting everything to a material existence, if that is what you are doing, is a construct you are trying to impose upon reality, and not reality as I see and experience it. My belief that ideas are real is an extension of my belief in myself and my free will. I can't see the logic in any conclusion I might make which excludes my being there to make it. The computer is not aware of itself; I am. But, I am not so aware of myself that I can convince myself that I do not exist. I see and accept that I, and all others, are more than our physical presence, and more important than anything physical. There is a part of me which is not material, yet real. Ideas exist in the same way, and they impact the material world, as I can. I can write down my idea, but the slip of paper does not become the idea, and more than alterations in the circuits in a computer become the software.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."

Atla
Posts: 1153
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 11th, 2020, 11:10 am

Steve3007 wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 10:51 am
If you haven't already seen it, you may enjoy this topic:

viewtopic.php?p=232485#p232485

In the video which inspired the topic, the presenter of the lecture discusses this idea of theories that are predicatively accurate but which some might regard as philosophically unsatisfying.
Well I've been trying to make sense of QM since a decade or so, it's still a work in progress. I'm training my mind to think in at least one more dimension. I won't get into it that now, but suffice to say from what I gather, of course the only way forward is some heavily modified variation of the MWI or some relative state interpretation. And it has to be within the nondualist philosophical metaparadigm, so Western philosophy doesn't play.

Atla
Posts: 1153
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 11th, 2020, 11:14 am

chewybrian wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 10:53 am
Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 9:45 am

No, you are just making a similar reification fallacy with language, and then you draw a parallel with software.
Right back at you.

You have attributed a material existence to the ideas that are the essence of the software, and wish to pretend those ideas exist only in that material form, in the atoms and molecules inside the computer. But, the software entered into the computer is nothing if not encoding of ideas that existed in the mind of the man who wrote them. No idea ever enters the computer, but a keystroke or a reading of a spot on a disc is the physical reflection of the non-physical ideas. Such ideas have no material existence, and I am the one who is here trying to say they do not. Yet, I do not deny their existence, and the impact of ideas upon material things. They are real, yet not material--spooky, huh?

Restricting everything to a material existence, if that is what you are doing, is a construct you are trying to impose upon reality, and not reality as I see and experience it. My belief that ideas are real is an extension of my belief in myself and my free will. I can't see the logic in any conclusion I might make which excludes my being there to make it. The computer is not aware of itself; I am. But, I am not so aware of myself that I can convince myself that I do not exist. I see and accept that I, and all others, are more than our physical presence, and more important than anything physical. There is a part of me which is not material, yet real. Ideas exist in the same way, and they impact the material world, as I can. I can write down my idea, but the slip of paper does not become the idea, and more than alterations in the circuits in a computer become the software.
Ideas are abstract, and made of matter too. Technically they are part of your head.
Now I'm not a materialist of course, by matter I just mean whatever we pretend that everything is made of.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4175
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Terrapin Station » January 11th, 2020, 11:17 am

Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 6:29 am
Terrapin Station wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 6:15 am


I wasn't saying that it's different than properties, I was just using the common language for this. Otherwise I almost always wind up having to explain the less common language, or folks just ignore it.

You're not addressing the point, though. Mental properties are simply properties of matter, just like all other properties.
I didn't know that that's your point. So in that case, where does the Standard model for example list mental properties as properties of matter?
You're not thinking that the standard model lists every single property of all matter, are you? For example, does it list the properties of how stereo systems produce music from vinyl albums?

Atla
Posts: 1153
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 11th, 2020, 11:22 am

Terrapin Station wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:17 am
Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 6:29 am

I didn't know that that's your point. So in that case, where does the Standard model for example list mental properties as properties of matter?
You're not thinking that the standard model lists every single property of all matter, are you? For example, does it list the properties of how stereo systems produce music from vinyl albums?
Sure, the part of the inside of the human head called human mind is made of 'matter', and stereo systems are made of 'matter' etc., but then everything is a property of matter. I don't think that's a good definition for property.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4175
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Terrapin Station » January 11th, 2020, 11:30 am

Not that anything I was saying is in any way dependent on any current theory of physics, by the way. Physicalism/materialism isn't something that's subservient to the current state of physics as a science (as the social practice, the contingent set of beliefs under its rubric, etc.)

Physicalism/materialism is a stance in ontology, about what the nature of the world is.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4175
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Terrapin Station » January 11th, 2020, 11:31 am

Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:22 am
Terrapin Station wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:17 am


You're not thinking that the standard model lists every single property of all matter, are you? For example, does it list the properties of how stereo systems produce music from vinyl albums?
Sure, the part of the inside of the human head called human mind is made of 'matter', and stereo systems are made of 'matter' etc., but then everything is a property of matter. I don't think that's a good definition for property.
Wait--stop at "sure" as an answer to my question. Give me a citation for any statement of the standard theory listing the properties of stereo systems.

Atla
Posts: 1153
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 11th, 2020, 11:35 am

Terrapin Station wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:31 am
Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:22 am

Sure, the part of the inside of the human head called human mind is made of 'matter', and stereo systems are made of 'matter' etc., but then everything is a property of matter. I don't think that's a good definition for property.
Wait--stop at "sure" as an answer to my question. Give me a citation for any statement of the standard theory listing the properties of stereo systems.
What are you replying to?

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4175
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Terrapin Station » January 11th, 2020, 11:43 am

Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:35 am
Terrapin Station wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:31 am


Wait--stop at "sure" as an answer to my question. Give me a citation for any statement of the standard theory listing the properties of stereo systems.
What are you replying to?
???

I asked you a question, and you responded "sure." I'm addressing "sure" as an answer to my question.

Atla
Posts: 1153
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 11th, 2020, 11:51 am

Terrapin Station wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:43 am
Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:35 am

What are you replying to?
???

I asked you a question, and you responded "sure." I'm addressing "sure" as an answer to my question.
Maybe you should read the rest of that comment.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4175
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Terrapin Station » January 11th, 2020, 12:10 pm

Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:51 am
Terrapin Station wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:43 am

???

I asked you a question, and you responded "sure." I'm addressing "sure" as an answer to my question.
Maybe you should read the rest of that comment.
I said "Wait--Let's discuss 'Sure' first."

"Sure" was an answer to my question, no?

Atla
Posts: 1153
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 11th, 2020, 12:17 pm

Terrapin Station wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 12:10 pm
Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 11:51 am

Maybe you should read the rest of that comment.
I said "Wait--Let's discuss 'Sure' first."

"Sure" was an answer to my question, no?
Umm no, did you read the rest of that comment?

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4175
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Terrapin Station » January 11th, 2020, 12:25 pm

Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 12:17 pm
Terrapin Station wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 12:10 pm


I said "Wait--Let's discuss 'Sure' first."

"Sure" was an answer to my question, no?
Umm no, did you read the rest of that comment?
Yes, I read the rest of the comment. But I wanted you to answer my question.

So apparently you didn't answer my question, and I have no idea what "Sure" was in response to. Could you answer my question first?

Atla
Posts: 1153
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Magical thinking in science and philosophy

Post by Atla » January 11th, 2020, 12:31 pm

Terrapin Station wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 12:25 pm
Atla wrote:
January 11th, 2020, 12:17 pm

Umm no, did you read the rest of that comment?
Yes, I read the rest of the comment. But I wanted you to answer my question.

So apparently you didn't answer my question, and I have no idea what "Sure" was in response to. Could you answer my question first?
You are making pretty lame attempts at trolling, don't you think?

Locked