4 ms·
There is a strong tradition of physicists (scientists of all stripes, really) assuming they have some deep understanding of the natural universe and logic far b
by wfo 11y ago
There is a strong tradition of physicists (scientists of all stripes, really) assuming they have some deep understanding of the natural universe and logic far beyond that of philosophers and stepping far outside their expertise to say laughably absurd and quackish things about hard problems in philosophy. So I appreciate your caution.
But it's also the case that just because a physicist is trying to tackle consciousness -- a much harder problem than anything physicists have taken on this far -- doesn't make him a quack. To dismiss it out of hand is foolish; IIT is a thing and this paper certainly fits within that framework, though I don't know enough to judge it beyond that without careful study. But from your post, neither do you.
- sytelus 11y agoNo self respecting physicist would claim to have deep understanding of anything. The entire process of scientific investigation runs on self-doubt. To keep things grounded, theory-experiment-new theory cycle is essential. If you can't verify your theory then you are as well be doing philosophy.
- dingbat 11y agoif you read the article its clear that Tegmark is raising deeper questions, not claiming to have the answers.