Re: [atheists-27] Sean Carroll on the "Hard Problem"
| From: | Pankaj |
| Sent on: | Saturday, May 21, 2016, 1:43 AM |
i think it is more like saying that the moon causes tides through the process of "tidemergence", which is a word which signifies a correlation. it has nothing more to say on the mediating mechanisms (which is basically all of physics). im sure noone would have been satisfied if we had left it at "tidemergence".
as i see it, chalmers claims of a "hard problem" - the mediating mechanisms between a certain configuration of matter creating subjective experience are unknown - dont really run contrary to established science.
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 10:29 PM, Mathew Goldstein <[address removed]> wrote:
Regarding this comment: "However, to say that a certain configuration of matter creates subjective experience, and on being asked "how", to say "its emergence silly" seems like clumsy science to me, or rather, a science in its infancy which is claiming more than its capable of. the hardest part in science is to formulate the right questions, and i don't think we have the right questions for the subject matter of consciousness."
Saying that consciousness is an emergent phenomena is equivalent to saying that a minimally complex brain is needed to experience consciousness. Emergence is so ubiquitous that saying consciousness is an emergent phenomena isn't saying much.
There is a distinction between unjustified and justified speculation. When attempting to locate the general direction where the answer most likely resides (in contexts where evidence to support a particular answer is unavailable or limited), justified speculation maintains a good fit with the available evidence while unjustified speculation breaks the constraint of fitting with the available evidence. So, for example, the speculations of Dennett and Carroll are justified while the speculations of Chopra are unjustified. Although he is more constrained than Chopra, Chalmers is attracted to possibilities that do not fit well with empirically derived constraints. The place where the boundary between justified and unjustified speculations is crossed can be ambiguous, and Chalmers arguably stays more within that ambiguous zone than Chopra.
> On May 20, 2016, at 12:34 AM, Don Wharton <[address removed]> wrote:
>
> However, to say that a certain configuration of matter creates subjective experience, and on being asked "how", to say "its emergence silly" seems like clumsy science to me, or rather, a science in its infancy which is claiming more than its capable of. the hardest part in science is to formulate the right questions, and i don't think we have the right questions for the subject matter of consciousness.
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
http://www.meetup.com/DC-Atheists/
This message was sent by Meetup on behalf of Mathew Goldstein (http://www.meetup.com/DC-Atheists/members/49395042/) from DC Atheists Meetup.
Set my mailing list to email me
As they are sent
http://www.meetup.com/DC-Atheists/list_prefs/?pref=1
In one daily email
http://www.meetup.com/DC-Atheists/list_prefs/?pref=2
Don't send me mailing list messages
http://www.meetup.com/DC-Atheists/list_prefs/?pref=0
Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]
People in this
group are also in:
-
Mid-Atlantic Hiking Group
24,272 Outdoor Enthusiasts
-
Washington Area Secular Humanists Meetup Group
1,954 Humanists
-
! ! i wanted to do that . . . just not alone ! ! ! ™ DC
17,485 Funsters
-
Veg Society of DC Vegan Meetup
7,611 Vegans
-
Metro DC Democratic Socialists of America (MDC DSA)
5,286 Democratic Socialists
-
Data Science DC
15,602 Data Scientists