Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - LMNO, PhD (life continues)

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 1983
Plus, he unironically used the word "ergo".  In public.

How is it Mike still has a job, again?

You are so much more amusing than the Philosophy 101 I'm dealing with.

"Physics is the science of how matter and energy interact. That speaks very little to consciousness, and is still reductionist/rationalist/materialist, which speak even less to consciousness. The physical world (I still don't like calling it "world") may be amplitudes in configuration space as far as you and physics are concerned, but consciousness isn't. Ergo, if your reality is physical in nature, consciousness cannot be reality."

Sadly, the argument is going in the direction of "reality is only perception" and "conciousness is not a physical aspect".

The Trickster accesses your shadow psyche, compelling you.

I counter with

Ugh.  Arguing with a Jungian on FB about Quantum Physics.  Why do I do this?

Already sent PM, but I'll say it publicly: Go for it.

Huh.  Interesting take.  I like the idea or "trust networks" and how it fits into economic theory.  It reminds me of this TED talk, and as brief as it is, really delves deep into the psychological aspects of trade and trust.

Well, at least those practicing homeopathy are drinking enough water.

Maybe everyone was just dehydrated, you know?

I started to write up something about general relativity and how it relates to Newtonian physics, and how classical mechanics is just a limited case of general relativity, but then I realized how useless that would be.  Pearls, swine, etc.

Hm. Not a big fan of FF. But the above page doesn't link to any evidence, nor provides a timeline. FF has been around for 20 years. The above link even says the page was taken down (but not when). So this has a 53% chance of being clickbait.

Holist, your understanding of quantum physics is about 60 years out of date.

I think it's more that the linguistic style does not lend itself well to higher-level thoughts and observations; so when it's attempted, it really opens itself up to misinterpretation.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 1983