The Intrusion of Spiritualism in Modern Science

1. In Evolutionary Biology, the gene is regarded as the replicating unit. Behaviour is designed to maximize survival of the gene. However, it is never a particular gene that survives, but the pattern of a gene. The pattern is a not a physical or energetic entity and can usefully be regarded as a spirit.

2. In neurobiology the brain is credited with causing experience and behaviour. To accomodate this view, it is essential that a non-material spirit be constructed that is the recipient of experience and behaviour manufactured by the brain.

3. In medicine, brain matter is sometimes said to be disordered, causing mental illnesses. As matter itself cannot be said to be disordered, it is suggested that the disorder is a spirit or non-material energy that resides in the brain.

4. In quantum physics, the observer is credited with affecting physical outcomes. The observer is not defined physically, so here we have an example of a non-material energy affecting quantum physical outcomes.

5. In the theory of mathematics, numbers are said to continue indefinitely. As numbers occur only as contingent constructions, we must suppose that the mathematician places a "hidden mathematician" beside each number who can secretely construct succeeding numbers. It would not be useful here to claim that the "hidden mathematician" is not physical, as mathematics itself is not physical. We may, however, use the example of the hidden mathematician as a representative of mathematics and its contingent nature. Contingency, as appearance and disappearance, is not a property of a purely physical universe.

John Jones wrote:

1. In Evolutionary Biology, the gene is regarded as the replicating unit. Behaviour is designed to maximize survival of the gene. However, it is never a particular gene that survives, but the pattern of a gene. The pattern is a not a physical or energetic entity and can usefully be regarded as a spirit.

If this were true, then the term "spirit" would be interchangable with "information".

John Jones wrote:

2. In neurobiology the brain is credited with causing experience and behaviour. To accomodate this view, it is essential that a non-material spirit be constructed that is the recipient of experience and behaviour manufactured by the brain.

Spirit = Self

John Jones wrote:

3. In medicine, brain matter is sometimes said to be disordered, causing mental illnesses. As matter itself cannot be said to be disordered, it is suggested that the disorder is a spirit or non-material energy that resides in the brain.

Matter itself can not be disordered, but patterns of matter can. A living brain is a pattern of matter and that pattern can be distorted without calling it a spirit.

John Jones wrote:

4. In quantum physics, the observer is credited with affecting physical outcomes. The observer is not defined physically, so here we have an example of a non-material energy affecting quantum physical outcomes.

Yes.

John Jones wrote:

5. In the theory of mathematics, numbers are said to continue indefinitely. As numbers occur only as contingent constructions, we must suppose that the mathematician places a "hidden mathematician" beside each number who can secretely construct succeeding numbers. It would not be useful here to claim that the "hidden mathematician" is not physical, as mathematics itself is not physical. We may, however, use the example of the hidden mathematician as a representative of mathematics and its contingent nature. Contingency, as appearance and disappearance, is not a property of a purely physical universe.

You lost me on this one. I'm better with short sentences.


So what were you getting at with all this? Are you trying to quantify "spirit", or find some way to measure it?

If this were true, then the term "spirit" would be interchangable with "information".

Matter itself can not be disordered, but patterns of matter can. A living brain is a pattern of matter and that pattern can be distorted without calling it a spirit.

You lost me on this one. I'm better with short sentences.

So what were you getting at with all this? Are you trying to quantify "spirit", or find some way to measure it?

John,

You threads all make the same mistake-- trying to equate science and religion.

Science is not a religion; and religion is not a science.

Science deals with things that are testable. Religion accepts things by faith.

Some of your assertions on this thread, there is nothing inherently wrong. There certainly could be a "spirit" (you need to define this term better) inherent in genes. There is nothing in mathematics that says there isn't a "hidden mathematician".

But these assertions are not scientific-- i.e. there is no way using experiment or formalized logic to prove these assertions. But as philosophy (i.e. things you just accept) they are fine.

Your view on Quantum Physics has a problem in the term "non-material energy". It doesn't make any sense to anyone who has studied Quantum physics. You clearly don't understand what we mean by "observer" in quantum physics. It is a mathematical idea controlled by a rigorous mathematics-- not a philosophical one.

Medicine also deals with things that can be scientifically measured and detected. When we treat a bacterial disease, we can see the microbes that cause it. We can run experiments to show the link between a microbe and the disease. We can then develop medicine (or another treatment) that we can prove by experiment solves the problem.

Yes, mental disorders are a bit more complex (and controversial). But in many cases we can run experiments to detect problems. A tumor can cause mood swings, and this is a very "non-spiritual" cause. Science can answer the question if a gene is connected to some disorders (i.e. schizophrenia and depression) and these scientific studies are leading to treatments that have some effect.

There will probably be some psychological disorders that are and should be outside the realm of science (because they deal with emotion and culture).

But if problems, be they germs or tumors or hormones or genetic disorders that are shown to be scientific-- meaning that they are linked to a definite cause that can be measured by experiement-- then we should use science to address them.

Science has been shown the most effective answer to scientific problems-- especially in the medical field.

If your kid has pneumonia do you accept penicillin (which was descovered by scientific research and shown effective by experiement) to kill the germs that science says is causing it, or do you find a way to reoder the non-material energy.

I don't have a problem if you choose to pray...

but please use the penicillin.

I am trying to show that science is hypocritical to claim that it is 'unsuperstitious'.

A difference might be that information is not a property of an object, whereas spirit is.

John Jones wrote:

I am trying to show that science is hypocritical to claim that it is 'unsuperstitious'.

How does your attempt to equate things, like "information" and "disorder", with "spirit" show that science is superstitious?

John Jones wrote:

A difference might be that information is not a property of an object, whereas spirit is.

You seem quite sure of yourself when you say that spirit is a property of an object. How do you know?

Information is not a property of an object, but spirit is defined as being a property of an object when the object is the brain, for example. We say that mind is 'in the brain'.

John Jones wrote:

Information is not a property of an object, but spirit is defined as being a property of an object when the object is the brain, for example. We say that mind is 'in the brain'.

What definition of spirit are you using? Are you saying that spirit is synonomous with "thought", or with "awareness"?

4. In quantum physics, the observer is credited with affecting physical outcomes. The observer is not defined physically, so here we have an example of a non-material energy affecting quantum physical outcomes.

John Jones wrote:

4. In quantum physics, the observer is credited with affecting physical outcomes. The observer is not defined physically, so here we have an example of a non-material energy affecting quantum physical outcomes.

Only if he measures them. As long as he doesn't measure, everything goes its mechanical, non-spiritual way. And yes, the observer is described physically throught the collapse of the wavefunction. It's not a very graphical description, but it is a physical one. For details, see the Feynman Lectures, Vol. 3.

It is not possible, I believe, to infer an observer from a 'collapse of the wave-function', so I do not see how the collapse of a 'wave-function' can define or physically describe an observer.

Also, I think that we map observer to wave-function, but a mapping does not establish a relationship.

...as far as science is concerned I think that each term is as good as the other; in that, both are considered by science to be non-material agencies, like thought and awareness, and all hold a contradictory claim to existence.

John Jones wrote:

It is not possible, I believe, to infer an observer from a 'collapse of the wave-function', so I do not see how the collapse of a 'wave-function' can define or physically describe an observer.

It doesn't. The wave function and the matrixes operating on it are a mathematical model of reality. The collapse of the wave function is how the influence of the observer is modeled in this mathematical formalism. There is no inference involved.

John Jones wrote:

Also, I think that we map observer to wave-function, but a mapping does not establish a relationship.

Read Feynman III. Really. I don't mean to be arrogant, and I'm sorry if I sound that way, but there is just no point in philosophizing about these things without some foundations in what quantum physics textbooks are really saying.

The collapse of the wave function is how the influence of the observer is modeled in this mathematical formalism.

John Jones wrote:

...as far as science is concerned I think that each term is as good as the other; in that, both are considered by science to be non-material agencies, like thought and awareness, and all hold a contradictory claim to existence.

The difference being that thought and awareness are known to exist, whereas, the spirit is not (depending on your definition of course... which is why I asked...).

M Behaviour is designed to maximize survival of the gene.

John Jones wrote:

M Behaviour is designed to maximize survival of the gene.

Behavior is designed to maximize the survival of the phenotype (individual) the genes of that phenotype are simply along for the ride. If a sufficient number of individuals with a particular gene survive and reproduce then so does the gene.

You basic premiss is wrong