3 ms·
We already know atoms in aggregate experience something. That's settled. If you want to argue that individual atoms are incapable of feeling, then you need to
by CuriouslyC 7y ago
We already know atoms in aggregate experience something. That's settled. If you want to argue that individual atoms are incapable of feeling, then you need to explain how the interaction of atoms brings something distinctly non-physical into being. The ironic thing is your position is actually the one that requires additional evidence, while the position you're arguing against is well supported.
- ajuc 7y ago> If you want to argue that individual atoms are incapable of feeling, then you need to explain how the interaction of atoms brings something distinctly non-physical into being. How do you know it is nonphysical? How is it more nonphysical than "rain" or "red" or "planet". Neither of these things shows up in any law of physics. > We already know atoms in aggregate experience something. What do you mean by "experience"? > the position you're arguing against is well supported The position I'm arguing against provides no predictions. I can make even better theory if you value that: "everything happens because of magic". I'll call it the ultimate theory of everything, because it explains everything and cannot be disproved.