Timeline for Can the laws of physics rule out disembodied minds?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2022 at 17:08 | history | edited | Mark Andrews | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Formatting
|
| Jun 30, 2022 at 15:51 | comment | added | Dcleve | @JustAnotherInquirer -- I think you are looking for a dialog on interactive dualism and physics. Comments are supposed to be focused on ways an answer may be improved, or may have erroneous points, and most of these comments are well beyond that. I have created a chat forum for further dialog instead: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/137434/… We can discuss further there. | |
| Jun 29, 2022 at 16:31 | comment | added | user59388 | While energy may not be conserved or even defined in regions where space-time is not flat, this is not the case for the human body (or just the brain, if you prefer), where energy is well defined and locally conserved. Of course, if you apply a law beyond its domain of applicability, it will be violated. But so what? The fact that Newton's laws can't be applied to black holes doesn't stop engineers from relying on them for things on Earth. | |
| Jun 29, 2022 at 16:31 | comment | added | user59388 | There is more than one way to state the law of conservation of energy. For discussions in philosophy of mind, what matters is just that energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only change form. It is the local conservation of energy. An isolated system is not necessary for this principle to work. | |
| Jun 29, 2022 at 16:30 | comment | added | user59388 | Moreover, the author doesn't rule out the appeal to disembodied minds to explain phenomena in the physical world for dogmatic reasons, but because he thinks physics already established, beyond a reasonable doubt, that they don't influence the physical world. A perpetual motion machine, for example, is not a logical impossibility, but it is extremely likely that no one will ever create a machine like that. | |
| Jun 29, 2022 at 16:30 | comment | added | user59388 | In the first place, there are many flavours of dualism in philosophy and the author is just arguing against interactionist dualism. It's likely that the reason why he thinks science cannot judge alone whether minds are material is that some aspects of the question are philosophical rather than empirical, and I see nothing wrong with that. He's just saying that philosophy will be necessary to solve the problem. Check out this article in which philosopher stephen law discusses the limits of science. | |
| Jun 28, 2022 at 14:14 | history | edited | Dcleve | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Jun 27, 2022 at 20:41 | history | edited | Dcleve | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 34 characters in body
|
| Jun 27, 2022 at 17:58 | history | edited | Dcleve | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added dark matter nd energy, the nature of science, and the Fales rejection of scientism (everything reduces to science) to writeup.
|
| Jun 27, 2022 at 8:41 | history | answered | Dcleve | CC BY-SA 4.0 |