Re: Dual-Aspect Science

From: 1Z <peterdjones.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:55:54 -0000

Colin Hales wrote:

> Think about it...When you put the scientist back inside the picture, the
> measurement process (qualia) that literally are qualia is directly causally
> linked to the appearance you get!

The scientist has never been separate in that sense.
The question is *how* qualia are causally produced,
or rather, how they can emerge from structure.

>The underlying structure unifies the whole
> system. Of course you'll get some impact via the causality of the
> structure....via the deep structure right down into the very fabric of
> space.
>
> In a very real way the existence of 'mysterious observer dependence' is
> actually proof that the hierarchically organised S(.) structure idea must be
> somewhere near the answer.

Not really. You can have a two-way causal interdependene between
two systems without them both having th esame structure.

> Note that we don't actually have to know what S(.) is to make a whole pile
> of observations of properties of organisations of it that apply regardless
> of the particular S(.). It may be we never actually get to sort out the
> specifics of S(.)! (I have an idea, but it doesn't matter from the point of
> view of understanding qualia as another property of the structure like
> atoms).

> In Bruno's terms the structure of S(.) is what he calls 'objective reality'.
> I would say that in science the first person view has primacy.

Epistemic or Ontic ?

> I'd say that
> we formulate abstractions that correlate with agreed appearances within the
> first person view. However, the correspo0ndence between the underlying
> structure and the formulate abstractions is only that - a correlation. Our
> models are not the structure.

*Could* they be the structure ? if it necessarily
the case that the "structure" cannot be modelled, then
it is perhaps no strcuture at all.


> Yes....all these things rely on perceptual mechanisms which will
> never...repeat...never...be found in quantum mechanics....nor any other
> depiction of appearances.

Why not ?


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Tue Aug 15 2006 - 10:57:59 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:12 PST