19
   

Where is the self? How can dualism stand if it's just a fiction?

 
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  3  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 12:47 pm
@MattDavis,
Have you heard of pilot waves or waves as guiding particles ? there are some new perspectives that now claim that perhaps both wave and particle exist, the particle being guided by the wave...and the results are coming from macro phenomena where Newtonian physics can be applied.

Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 12:51 pm
@igm,
Quote:
Is it a notion or a peaceful open-minded state of mind?


I can only offer an opinion, igm...and my opinion would be that it is a notion.

We are having a conversation...or at very least, we have the illusion of having a conversation. I submit that either the conversation or the illusion of the conversation ARE possible characteristics of REALITY.

Other than by simply asserting they are not...can you give me any reason for accepting that they CANNOT be...which is where I would be if I accepted your assertion that there are no characteristics of REALITY?
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 01:04 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
if I accepted your assertion that there are no characteristics of REALITY?
Interesting observation Frank, the assertion depending upon the location of that imaginary line in the imaginary scale of abstraction as I hope you might remember from many past postings
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 01:07 pm
@dalehileman,
Quote:
Quote:
Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5261563)
Quote:
if I accepted your assertion that there are no characteristics of REALITY?

Interesting observation Frank, the assertion depending upon the location of that imaginary line in the imaginary scale of abstraction as I hope you might remember from many past postings


You got too cute here, Dale. I honestly do not understand your point.
MattDavis
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 01:22 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Thanks Fil!
That's intriguing. I have always harbored a suspicion that such things as wave/particle duality and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle are modeling problems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

My suspicion is most aroused by how such mathematically simple things can produce such complex/unpredictable behavior. Like cellular automata.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CellularAutomaton.html
http://math.hws.edu/xJava/CA/ca_1024x768.png
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 01:42 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I honestly do not understand your point.
Sorry Frank, in my massive ego I had assumed you might earlier have picked up my assertion about the duality and arbitrariness of "reality"

http://able2know.org/topic/209050-1
dalehileman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 01:43 pm
@MattDavis,
Matt that was beautiful, you've again made my day
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 02:24 pm
Frank, I don't mean to demean your efforts here, but when it comes to the "truths" of Buddhism, at least the meditative forms such as zen and its cousins, it does not much matter what the Buddha taught. What does matter is what one comes to perceive after persistent and sincere meditation. This is very different from the kinds of "knowledge" generated by either the inductive or deductive logical techniques. In other words there is little chance of sharing Buddhist insights with you given your cognitive commitments. Understand that I am not criticizing you any more than I would criticise a Fijian for his inability to grasp our American cultural notions because of his (mostly unconscious) commitments to Fijian presuppositions.
Oh, and let me stress that one does not arrive at the logical conclusion or make a guess that the ego does not exist; one comes to have a very different sense of its ontological status.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 03:01 pm
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 03:08 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
No machine is capable of reproducing itself, because it has no way to have access to all the raw materials necessary.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 03:09 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
MattDavis
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 03:23 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Thanks Fil that is a great into to self-organization and self-reference.
I think you might enjoy Godel, Escher Bach if you haven't already read it.
The video's connection to cellular automata however is a little loose.
A much more strict treatment is in A New Kind of Science (a horribly immodest title, but what to do?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del,_Escher,_Bach
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_new_kind_of_science
0 Replies
 
MattDavis
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 03:46 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
I don't have time to watch that all right now.
Probably will sometime later today or tomorrow, though Smile
0 Replies
 
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 03:54 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Have you heard of pilot waves or waves as guiding particles ? there are some new perspectives that now claim that perhaps both wave and particle exist, the particle being guided by the wave...and the results are coming from macro phenomena where Newtonian physics can be applied.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmC0ygr08tE[/youtube]

Thanks Fil, very interesting!
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 03:56 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
No machine is capable of reproducing itself, because it has no way to have access to all the raw materials necessary.
Cis wouldn't a robot be able to round it all up
igm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 03:59 pm
@JLNobody,
Thanks JL nicely put... as usual.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 04:02 pm
@dalehileman,
How? If the raw materials are in another country, or it had to be mined at different locations - and it still needed to be processed before use.
MattDavis
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 04:04 pm
@cicerone imposter,
It's almost like you've never seen Transformers? Laughing Rolling Eyes
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 04:05 pm
@MattDavis,
What kind of "transformer?"
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Feb, 2013 04:09 pm
@cicerone imposter,
As Matt implies immediately above, why not

Presumably it can do anything we can
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/30/2024 at 01:57:43