I also find it hard to say that flat-earth positions are not pseudoscience, but this has nothing to do with anything we have said. I’m not defending philosophers who make claim to unscientific theories. I’m only saying that science is a 3rd person approach to the ‘physical’, and awareness is not. - ThreadSky

jamesdmac.bsky.social • 90 days ago

I also find it hard to say that flat-earth positions are not pseudoscience, but this has nothing to do with anything we have said. I’m not defending philosophers who make claim to unscientific theories. I’m only saying that science is a 3rd person approach to the ‘physical’, and awareness is not.

Comments

jccust.bsky.social•90 days ago

See, it seems you are denying or ignoring that science is already addressing the 'awareness' problem. If you are making unscientific claims about awareness, you are in the realm of pseudoscience. I'm not 'name-calling' or insulting; I'm just pointing out the incongruence.

jamesdmac.bsky.social•90 days ago

There is nothing incongruent about distinguishing between 3rd person attempts to describe the nature of awareness, and actually being aware, is there? As far as I know, there is no satisfactory explanation yet for the ‘physical’. If awareness is ‘physical’ then being aware is a valid approach to it.

jccust.bsky.social•90 days ago

I really don't know what you are arguing here. My whole point in this thread is simply that non-physical approaches to the questions in the philosophy of mind are not scientific (or, they are pseudoscience). Of course, any other non-observable or non-sharable approaches are not scientific either.

jamesdmac.bsky.social•90 days ago

It really depends upon how one uses this language of ‘physical’ and ‘non-physical’. What is ‘physical’? Is it fields, strings, quantum foam? Some kind of vacuum energy with local excitations? If it’s ontology is not separable from 1st person awareness, then there are 2 approaches to the ‘physical’.

jccust.bsky.social•90 days ago

As i said many times here: 'physical' in the scientific sense usually means what is in the scope of the consequences of the fundamental physical interactions (the 2 quantum forces, electromagnetism and gravity).

jamesdmac.bsky.social•90 days ago

…Which is still an incomplete, partial description we arrive at from the 3rd person perspective. My point is that this perspective or approach is not the only one to the ‘physical’. There is also the most intimate & immediate contact we have with it, which is our ‘being’ it in the 1st person.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply