[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by David

You don't seem to realise that some of us see science as having developed in a lop-sided way. This is no criticism of anyone involved, but the end result is that we have enormous detail of certain things, but only a very vague set of ideas about consciousness. Try looking at some orthodox ideas about consciousness if you want to experience some hand waving arguments.

And some of us read a paragraph like this and just shake our heads. First of all, could it be that consciousness is a complex problem and so more time is needed to understand the details? And second, how can you say "... some hand waving arguments" with a straight face, when the solution of idealists and dualists is nothing but a hand wave?

Remember that a lot of scientific development has begun with mavericks picking away at orthodox ideas.

By all means, the mavericks should pick away. It's funny you should say that they are picking away at the "orthodox ideas," when their fuzzy ideas have been around much longer. The unorthodox scientist is the one who says that consciousness is a brain process.

David, you keep doing something I simply don't understand: You keep talking about the alternative ideas as if they have contributed something that mainstream scientists simply choose to ignore. Can you list three testable ideas from the likes of Sheldrake or Radin? I don't think so.

~~ Paul