3 ms·

Why must physical information be outside of our head? It seems to me that the patterns, processes, and representations in our brains are physical information.

ukj 7y ago
Because nobody has a good idea where the brain (hardware) stops and where "the mind" (software) starts [1]. And nobody has any idea what "information" is beyond the Mathematical equation which define it. They are just linguistic/conceptual distinctions - useful models, but that is all they are - models. The map is not the territory [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind%E2%80%93body_dualism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind%E2%80%93body_dualism [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map%E2%80%93territory_relation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map%E2%80%93territory_relation
- dwaltrip 7y ago
  Hmm, thanks for the response. Obviously, this is a complex topic, but I don't find the points you bring sufficient to imply anything about the mind being non-physical -- let alone what that would even mean, if it could be precisely defined in a scientific way.
  - ukj 7y ago
    >the mind being non-physical -- let alone what that would even mean It's all just words - Philosophical language games [1]. Physical and non-physical are just words that we, humans made up. They are concepts - useful distinctions. Nothing more. There is no methodical way - no experiment you can perform that can confirm OR falsify the claim "Existence is physical". It's not a scientific claim - it's a philosophical one. It's not even wrong. It can't be wrong because it's an axiom. People who axiomatically assume that existence is "physical" (whatever that means) are called physicalists [2]. >if it could be precisely defined in a scientific way. Big IF. Does the absence of a scientific definition make it non-physical until a definition is produced? Even if it could be precisely defined then all you have produced is a definition of the mind in the language of Mathematics. A Mathematical model. Are Mathematical models "physical"? In 2019 some people even say that the Turing Machine is a model of the human mind. Are Mathematical models physical? If the mind is indeed a Turing Machine, does that mean the mind is physical? Myself, I am not a physicalist. I am not a non-physicalist either. I am a Model-dependent realist [3]. But more than that - I am a Linguistic Determinist [4] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_game_(philosophy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_game_(philosophy) [2] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/ [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-dependent_realism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-dependent_realism [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_determinism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_determinism

ukj 7y ago

Because nobody has a good idea where the brain (hardware) stops and where "the mind" (software) starts [1]. And nobody has any idea what "information" is beyond the Mathematical equation which define it. They are just linguistic/conceptual distinctions - useful models, but that is all they are - models. The map is not the territory [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind%E2%80%93body_dualism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind%E2%80%93body_dualism [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map%E2%80%93territory_relation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map%E2%80%93territory_relation

dwaltrip 7y ago
Hmm, thanks for the response. Obviously, this is a complex topic, but I don't find the points you bring sufficient to imply anything about the mind being non-physical -- let alone what that would even mean, if it could be precisely defined in a scientific way.
- ukj 7y ago
  >the mind being non-physical -- let alone what that would even mean It's all just words - Philosophical language games [1]. Physical and non-physical are just words that we, humans made up. They are concepts - useful distinctions. Nothing more. There is no methodical way - no experiment you can perform that can confirm OR falsify the claim "Existence is physical". It's not a scientific claim - it's a philosophical one. It's not even wrong. It can't be wrong because it's an axiom. People who axiomatically assume that existence is "physical" (whatever that means) are called physicalists [2]. >if it could be precisely defined in a scientific way. Big IF. Does the absence of a scientific definition make it non-physical until a definition is produced? Even if it could be precisely defined then all you have produced is a definition of the mind in the language of Mathematics. A Mathematical model. Are Mathematical models "physical"? In 2019 some people even say that the Turing Machine is a model of the human mind. Are Mathematical models physical? If the mind is indeed a Turing Machine, does that mean the mind is physical? Myself, I am not a physicalist. I am not a non-physicalist either. I am a Model-dependent realist [3]. But more than that - I am a Linguistic Determinist [4] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_game_(philosophy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_game_(philosophy) [2] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/ [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-dependent_realism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-dependent_realism [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_determinism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_determinism