4 ms·
Ultimately any intelligent process needs to arise from non-intelligent processes. This is so obvious that it’s hard to believe it needs stating.
by empath75 9y ago
Ultimately any intelligent process needs to arise from non-intelligent processes. This is so obvious that it’s hard to believe it needs stating.
- domevent 9y agoI think that’s partly the motivation behind panpsychism, although I haven’t studied the subject well enough to be sure.
- phkahler 9y ago>> Ultimately any intelligent process needs to arise from non-intelligent processes. I rather enjoyed the authors brief mention of atoms having some type of intelligence or consciousness. Perhaps they do and it's such a small amount that we can't detect it. Some have pointed out that mathematics is strangely well suited to describing physics, but clearly it will not work do describe phenomena that don't follow those types of mathematical models. I'm just playing devils advocate, I doubt what I just wrote but I can't refute it either. Some phenomena are actually defined as aggregate behavior - sound waves, coherent light, matter in the solid state - and cannot exist at the level of atoms or photons.
- pdonis 9y ago> Some phenomena are actually defined as aggregate behavior - sound waves, coherent light, matter in the solid state - and cannot exist at the level of atoms or photons. While this is true, it does not mean that these phenomena cannot be explained in terms of the behavior of atoms or photons. They can. The position of those who are called "Deniers" by the author of this article is simply that consciousness is another such phenomenon.
- Koshkin 9y ago> mathematics is strangely well suited to describing physics This is like saying that numbers are strangely well suited to counting things.