Re: Do Shadows [Souls] have weight?
- E-Rex wrote:
>I take this to be a question thrown in my direction, since I have asked
> If so is this mass counted when trying to calculate the total weight
> of the universe? If not then how do we explain the exsistance of
> shadows, something that obviously exists.
rhetorically whether entities such as "pattern", used in "transhumanist"
mythology as stand-ins for the concept of "soul" or "life force", have
mass or any other physically measurable quality of existence which is
separable from the so-called "substrate" of actual material (energy or
The argument here is that "shadows... obviously exist." But actually,
they obviously do not exist in the sense of physical things, i.e. all
things that do obviously exist. Rather, they may be said to exist only
in the same sense in which the soul, for example, or "the force of life"
may be said to actually exist, i.e. in the sense that actual matter in
the forms corresponding to the objects described by these terms exists.
Thus, "human souls" are quite unremarkably said to exist, roughly 6
billion of them at last report, and the "force of life" is said, with
understood meaning, to be manifest in the unfolding of that physical
life which unquestionably exists.
In the case of shadows, actual light in a distribution of propagation
angles described by the words "there is a shadow" exists, although "the
shadow" considered as an object in itself is but a phantom of the mind,
i.e. its appearance as constituting an object in the same sense as, say,
an egg or a neutron bomb, is merely an artifact of the way in which
one's brain strives to represent the world.
Likewise, the concept of "soul" is an ancient attempt to capture and
objectify the idea of persons as experienced simultaneously in physical
and in social terms. It fails the moment one conceives of it as an
object that is separable from the human body. If we remember that
"identity" is fundamentally a social phenomenon, i.e. that one's
"identity" has meaning only in relation to others, then we are able to
see the absurdity of supposing that "identity" is a substance of some
sort that could be transferred from ourselves to some other object.
- Greetings all. I am doing a car design exterior as well as interior and
will incorporate early nanotech since they want something "wild". I want to
make a strong diamonoid morphable skin but i know this is farther out than
2010. What near term MNT or even MEMS tech do you see and what would you
like to see in a 4 wheeled global mobility device? Are there sources you
can cite that I can use to explain to non Miller point types?
49 Showers Drive
Mountain View, CA 94040
- On Sun, 14 Oct 2001, Max Sims wrote:
> Greetings all. I am doing a car design exterior as well as interior andHa ha ha ha.
> will incorporate early nanotech since they want something "wild". I want to
> make a strong diamonoid morphable skin but i know this is farther out than
> 2010. What near term MNT or even MEMS tech do you see and what would you
> like to see in a 4 wheeled global mobility device? Are there sources youMEMS, inertial navigation. NEMS: nope, zilch, zero. Nanocomposites, maybe.
> can cite that I can use to explain to non Miller point types?
Carbon nanotube composites would come to mind. All near term, as a decade.