Quote:
Originally Posted by mszlazak  All Rosenblum and Kuttner mean by an "encounter" with consciousness is "to meet, usually unexpectedly." |
Yes, surly they at
least mean this, but don't they even hint at something more? Look at
this quote by Kuttner:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mszlazak
So, finally, does quantum mechanics reintroduce the transcendent, or the spiritual, into science? Can one honestly view the quantum enigma and deny all spiritual implications? Physics has encountered a profound mystery involving the essence of our humanity, our consciousness. This contradicts the mechanistic Newtonian worldview that many people incorrectly think science requires. The quantum enigma presents more questions than answers. But if you look at the undisputed physics facts with a mind that's at open, I don't see how you can avoid seeing something profoundly involving our humanity.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mszlazak That means it was surprising that someone even bothered to bring it up! |
Oh.. It was surprising they bothered? Then why did so many think it was relevant to bring it up? Having studied this enigma, I don't think it is strange to bring it up at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mszlazak Those "someones" probably thought they had good reasons to bring it up (e.g. von Neumann, Wigner, etc.) but it doesn't mean they really had good reasons and they didn't. I wouldn't put much stock in what physicists say about consciousness because it's not their field of expertise and once you read what people in consciousness related field say then it really shows that physicists are "out of their league."
--------------- |
Who says they didn't have a good reason and why?
We can probably list names on both sides here until our fingers start to bleed. It's a matter of interpretation and assumptions.
I do believe that there is something there to be taken seriously.
Do you think any of the no-consciousness interpretations solves anything beyond FAPP?
Why shouldn't physicists have anything to say about this?
First off, what is the paradigm of what you call
consciousness related fields (I'm assuming you are thinking of psychology, neuroscience and philosophy)?
It's materialistic determinism.
And what is the basic science that describe this paradigm?
It's physics!
So if physics encounters consciousness, or say that the world is not the billiard ball table of Newton's time, then shouldn't this influence the way these other fields view things? Or is it alright for them to live with their 1800's ideas of how the universe
really works?