35 ms·
Yes, just like the various interpretations of quantum mechanics, it's not a scientific question because it doesn't allow for any testable hypothesis. Science is
by nickelpro 5y ago
Yes, just like the various interpretations of quantum mechanics, it's not a scientific question because it doesn't allow for any testable hypothesis. Science is bound by the scientific method, questions of philosophy exist outside these bounds. Is math invented or discovered? Does the wave function collapse upon observation, or do observers exist in superposition? Is my "red" the same as your "red"?
Even if we could have exact answers to these questions, they wouldn't allow use to make predictions, and so they are not science. I think it's reasonable to say that means they aren't "useful", we can't go to space or build skyscrapers with these answers, but I think it equally makes them the more interesting questions. Our usual tools at rational inquiry fail to penetrate these sorts of questions.
- mach1ne 5y agoActually most of the problems you described are relevant and do exist in the objective world. The problem of the problem of consciousness is that there is no aspect in the definition of consciousness which couldn't be explained by objective mechanisms. Currently, asking whether there is a consciousness is like asking if there is glaxtimbo. What is glaxtimbo, you may ask? I can't explain it, but I feel like it is there. That's the extent to which the definition of consciousness in its unexplainable attributes currently reaches.
- joeberon 5y agoAs a doctor in quantum physics, we probably will be able to test between interpretations in the future, so you should not use this as an argument.