tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post1218911375765066818..comments2024-03-25T15:31:12.151-07:00Comments on We Live In A Political World: #102 / Something Is Happening HereGary A. Pattonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15049925834933920507noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post-91168449678715369122015-04-12T19:47:43.886-07:002015-04-12T19:47:43.886-07:00There's nothing worthwhile in posing false dic...There's nothing worthwhile in posing false dichotomy. Douglas Rushkoff is a comic book writer, not a scientist or philosopher. His answer to the 2014 Edge question is a perfect example of what's wrong with the format of giving a soap box to just about anyone with an uninformed opinion. To learn the informed, scientific point of view on the same issue, Daniel Dennett's reply to the same question. Spoiler alert, the hard problem of consciousness doesn't exist.<br /><br />1. https://edge.org/response-detail/25331<br />2. https://edge.org/response-detail/25289@PhysicsPolicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04664172982768472896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post-81298239580222234212015-04-12T10:15:07.686-07:002015-04-12T10:15:07.686-07:00In the next to the last paragraph, I meant to wrot...In the next to the last paragraph, I meant to wrote "The limits of human understanding do NOT limit physical realityMichael A. Lewishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980105313542633114noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post-56594972327260408132015-04-12T10:12:03.655-07:002015-04-12T10:12:03.655-07:00I've spent a considerable amount of time on th...I've spent a considerable amount of time on the Edge.org web site, reading the 175 essays dealing with the question that led to the 'why consciousness exists' essay.<br /><br />First of all, understand that this is a blurb promoting Rushkoff's new book, so it is by its own nature a bit hyperbolic.<br /><br />Secondly, note that Rushkoff identifies himself as: "Media Analyst; Documentary Writer; Author." He is not a scientist. <br /><br />Rushkoff posits "By starting with Godlessness as a foundational principle of scientific reasoning, we make ourselves unnecessarily resistant to the novelty of human consciousness, its potential continuity over time, and the possibility that it has purpose."<br /><br />This flies in the face of all of our understanding of human consciousness as a function of the human brain. Consciousness is what the brain does. When we throw out what we know about the physical world and call it "spiritual," we regress through 700 years of understanding of the world we inhabit.<br /><br />The fact that we do not fully understand how consciousness "works," how subjective experience arises from objective biological reality, does not mean that it is something beyond the physical world. Consciousness is an extremely complex behavior of an extremely complex biological organism. The limits of human understanding do limit physical reality. As we are learning, complexity and chaos have their regularities that we can study and know.<br /><br />There is no why. There is only what is.Michael A. Lewishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980105313542633114noreply@blogger.com