Quote:
Originally Posted by Tor  Yes, surly they at least mean this, but don't they even hint at something more? Look at this quote by Kuttner:
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.
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? |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tor 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? |
Here is Nauenberg's critique of "Quantum Enigma" (QE) which gives plenty of quotes, even ones of people that Rosenberg and Kuttner quote but actually say the opposite things. I'll let you read Nauenberg to see why. But it's not just quotes it's reasons that are in Nauenberg's critique of consciousness and the book QE. QE is a biased misleading presentation of these issues.
http://physics.ucsc.edu/~michael/qefoundations.pdf
Here is Kuttner's response to Nauenberg which admits: "that the encounter of physics with consciousness likely has no practical consequences for physics. It is metaphysics." He then fails to give a detailed response to Nauenberg lengthy critique.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0710.2361
I suggest you read Nauenberg completely before reading Kuttner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tor 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? |
I didn't say physicists should not say anything. They're free to say what they want.
AND
Physics deals with the wrong level or organization. That is why QT is irrelevent to brain/mind/consciousness/psychology issues. So generally, physicists are out of their league.
------------------------------