I was just talking about fascists being comfortable doing their philosophy on KZbin. Funny how I find you here.
@FlavioLanfranconi2 ай бұрын
I felt sad today. This soothed me somehow. ✨Thank you.✨
@BloodStarvedBrotherhood2 ай бұрын
Who is like God? We are, and I AM 💜
@teresacarapeto74902 ай бұрын
💛
@DelandaBaudLacanian2 ай бұрын
Ez-Eki-El and Dani-El in shambles rn
@hippykiller27752 ай бұрын
So, I was on this PBS Space Time discord and I happened to make an argument that I think fundamentally proves panpsychism to logically be the unquestionable reality of our universe. And I thought you might enjoy it.... "So I have been hearing about how people dont think that the brain is quantum, but I have a serious question in regards to that. Are there any theories in physics that explain why an atom in a rock acts so vastly different then an atom in a human brain? Because on a fundamental level the nature of an atom or a group of atoms is literally the experience of consciousness. I say that again, on some fundamental level the nature of an atom is consciousness. And if a rock or other things that are made out of atoms dont all have consciousness than the reasons the atoms in a human brain act differently is because of the fundamental substructure within the universe that govern the behavior or interactions of atoms themselves, IE: quantum mechanics. So tell me if I am wrong here but it seems like that logically proves that life and consciousness is inherently quantum in nature, because what makes one group of atoms a frog and the other a rock? Wouldn't it have to be the very structural nature and behavior of the atoms within the 2 contained systems? And if so a very fundamental nature to atoms is life itself! Which would fall into the realm of quantum mechanics right?!"
@Footnotes2Plato2 ай бұрын
I think this is eminently logical. But as Whitehead said: "Logic is the chosen resort of clear-headed people, severally convinced of the complete adequacy of their doctrines. It is such a pity that they cannot agree with each other." (Essays in Science and Philosophy, 212)
@hippykiller27752 ай бұрын
@@Footnotes2Plato I mean if you see a flaw in my argument feel free to point it out, but as far as I can see there is none. Like I put it like this, the atoms on the earth 5 billion years ago are quite literally the same atoms in our brains right now that give us the ability to think. Like literally humanity literally is the earth itself, it is just that our atoms are a couple of stages removed. But on some fundamental level those atoms always had the potential of consciousness. Like literally just imagine a river full of water and fish and green trees all around it and think about what that was 5 billion years ago! It was all just rocks! But all the atoms on the earth back then are the very same exact same atoms that makes everything else be alive now today. So atoms, the most basic thing in the universe from the start of the universe held the potential for consciousness. And I think life is general quantum, but even without that in order for that to be wrong wouldn't they have to argue that consciousness is not a product of atoms and the human body? Like if atoms have an innate potential to generate consciousness doesn't that mean consciousness is an inherently fundamental part of the entire universe? Like seriously think of all of the atoms is arranged differently in the universe could create consciousness. Little creepy if I am being real, but still doesn't that mean the inherent potential for consciousness might be in every atom in the universe or at least most of them? And at that point they would have to argue that consciousness doesn't come from atoms, which is an inherently ANTI materialist position.... Not sure if you are picking up what I am putting down, but I think this might be an airtight. Honestly, I just don't see a way out of having to acknowledge that consciousness creation or even just life is an inherently fundamental part of the nature of atoms. And if life in an inherent state of matter and atoms, it blows the current conceptions we have about the world out of the water right?
@hippykiller27752 ай бұрын
@@Footnotes2Plato And to be honest I was not making those points rhetorically, I am honestly interested in what you have to say. But as I look at it seems like that argument is an utter death blow to the materialistic worldview and general answer philosophically. Like I consider you to be one of the experts on this subject matter, so if you know anything that might make my argument fail or just a huge blind side that I am not seeing I would love to hear it, honestly.
@cae.k2 ай бұрын
@@hippykiller2775 I think you make an intriguing conjecture, but I'm not certain your argument reflects an accurate understanding of the 'nature' of the Physics/quantum physics involved. There are particles at the subatomic level much smaller than "atoms" (hence the term "subatomic"), from wikipedia: "Atoms are the basic particles of the chemical elements. An atom consists of a nucleus of protons and generally neutrons, surrounded by an electromagnetically bound swarm of electrons. The chemical elements are distinguished from each other by the number of protons that are in their atoms." Now, our brains operate chemically via neurons 'and' electrically via electrical impulses (a combination of matter & energy) - here's a link to a basic breakdown: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK234149/ A neuron is a braincell & there are about 200 trillion atoms in one neuron - - so, while there are many scientists studying the 'nature' of consciousness who are convinced (as you are) that the material/physical aspects of the brain do not produce consciousness - - they have not yet found any evidence to support the theory. Which is why so many scientists & atheists remain firmly convinced of the 'materialist' world-view. Here's a link to science research which takes the 'materials view' of consciousness way down to even the sub-quantum level to "Microtubules": www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140116085105.htm Here's a video discussion about quantum physics & spirituality - you'll love it! kzbin.info/www/bejne/pqKQfWaMeLihrbc
@BooksRebound28 күн бұрын
I have a lot of questions. But you'll have to define a bunch of things first so I even know what you really mean cause it's kind of word salad. "Brain is quantum" What do you mean? Its Macroscopic so no. But some individual atoms within it could be. "Atom in rock vs brain" how do they act differently? Can you explain in your own words your understanding of how they differ? "Fundamental level" is pretty much the opposite of what's going on as consciousness seems to be an emergent property. Much like individual ants aren't all that smart, but get a colony and they can solve fairly complex problems due to the emergent intelligence. Which seems to me to be the opposite of fundamental. But most importantly I don't think you're argument really works until you've got a sophisticated definition of "consciousness" and "nature of an atom".