Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

59168Re: [existlist] Re: Science and scientists

Expand Messages
  • eduardathome
    Jan 28, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes, you can redefine "consciousness" so that it no longer means
      "consciousness".

      Consciousness ... as used to be the word ... has the meaning of being aware.
      If you send a rock to Pluto, you have an interaction. But that does not
      mean that Pluto is aware of anything.

      eduard

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Mary
      Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 11:09 PM
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [existlist] Re: Science and scientists

      One of the wonderful areas of science is information theory. Using just a
      bit of the theory one can hypothesize, as did physicist David Bohm, that the
      brain and every other cosmic phenomenal structure receives and shares
      information. One could call this information 'consciousness' to the degree
      that it has stored properties. Awareness isn't limited to the human; that
      hubris would be an example of anthropomorphism. Awareness in an
      informational scheme which doesn't require a brain; it requires an
      interaction.

      May

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eduardathome wrote:
      >
      > Well ... it does get to be a bit much when he calls me "dense" and
      > "ignorant". I see this often. Some grand scheme like rocks having
      > consciousness. It just doesn't work out when you look at it closely.
      > Sure
      > we are connected to everything else, simply because we are part of the
      > universe. But that doesn't mean that the universe is somehow looking out
      > for humanity or can think. Wheeler and others were at one time saying
      > that
      > the universe is only out there because we are here to see it. That idea
      > also went down the drain. Which isn't to say that the concept of a cosmic
      > consciousness isn't a neat, warm and fuzzy feeling idea. Humans have [or
      > rather their brains have] invented all sorts of fantasies that are comfy,
      > but not real. It's time we entered the 21st century.
      >
      > eduard
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: William
      > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 6:01 PM
      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [existlist] Science and scientists
      >
      > Eduard, As you have found out Dick has little formal training in science.
      > He
      > is what you might call home schooled. He also equates knowing scientists
      > with knowing science. You will not change his mind because he believes he
      > knows science. In short knowing and believeing are definitional problems
      > for
      > Merlin. I do not think it makes him a bad guy , it just means he has a
      > problem with perception. Had he had formal scientific training the
      > statements he made about the sun would not have been posted.
      > Knowing scientists does not mean you know science. Studying science under
      > accredted scientists is a different matter as you well know. Bill
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!
      >
      > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
      >




      ------------------------------------

      Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

      Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
    • Show all 7 messages in this topic