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

Re: [existlist] Re: The administrations war

Expand Messages
  • eupraxis@aol.com
    Mary, I disagree with that science . Neurochemistry is an analogue; no more than that. It is not a determinant. Wil ... From: Mary
    Message 1 of 55 , Jul 29, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Mary,

      I disagree with that "science". Neurochemistry is an analogue; no more than that. It is not a determinant.

      Wil



      -----Original Message-----
      From: Mary <josephson45r@...>
      To: existlist <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thu, Jul 29, 2010 9:47 am
      Subject: [existlist] Re: The administrations war





      Hi Polly,

      You wrote, "I do not see existentialism as the basis for any particular political program. Prominent existentialists certainly have never arrived at any consensus with each other. What I see a rigorous existentialism doing is to render one naked to oneself, a position in which partisanship is no longer possible"

      I agree and wrote earlier, "I don't believe any specific spiritual attitude is more likely to cause a specific behavior than another."

      If science tells us we're determined by our neurochemistry, do you think efforts to render ourselves naked to ourselves, or "soul searching" in the other vernacular, are futile?

      Mary









      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Mary
      Tom, Bohm actually agreed with Einstein that the Copenhagen Interpretation was incomplete. For a simple explanation, which also points to Bohm s relationships
      Message 55 of 55 , Aug 10, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Tom, Bohm actually agreed with Einstein that the Copenhagen Interpretation was incomplete.
        For a simple explanation, which also points to Bohm's relationships with Einstein and Murray Gell-Mann, you might google and read: Dialectical Materialism and the Construction of a New Quantum theory: David Joseph Bohm by Christian Forstner. Bohn's pilot wave theory dismisses the wave function as a mathematical entity and restores an objective universe wherein incomplete knowledge of the observer doesn't affect the location or momentum of an electron. The article also touches on something you mention from time to time, causality vs. chance. Bohm says both exist as complementary opposites. Mary



        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:

        What really matters for me is . the more active role of the observer in quantum physics . According to quantum physics the observer has indeed a new relation to
        the physical events around him in comparison with the classical observer, who is merely a spectator.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.