3 ms·
The problem with anti-reductionist approach is that it doesn't explain anything and doesn't predict anything. It simply says "i was wrong about all those other
by chr1 8y ago
The problem with anti-reductionist approach is that it doesn't explain anything and doesn't predict anything.
It simply says "i was wrong about all those other things, but this next thing you can't explain in principle, because reasons (many books of untestable claims here)".
Even if we assume that consciousness or intelligence cannot be explained by physics, the anti-reductionist position still doesn't add anything because we need to try to explain it with physics anyway to find out that it is not possible.
- friendlybus 8y agoIt adds the ability to survive in an environment where all the perceived facts are against you, like a desert. Physics in theory might save you from a water-less desert, but you won't be able to access that as a useful solution in the stranded-survivor situation.
- chr1 8y agoHow exactly philosophy is going to save anyone in a desert?