Re: memetics-digest V1 #1049

From: Dace (edace@earthlink.net)
Date: Tue May 21 2002 - 07:39:37 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: morality and memes"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id HAA20900 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 21 May 2002 07:44:27 +0100
    Message-ID: <004201c20092$480c8340$75c1b3d1@teddace>
    From: "Dace" <edace@earthlink.net>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: Re: memetics-digest V1 #1049
    Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:39:37 -0700
    Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003F_01C20057.9AB36CC0"
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    > > > > > Life is an expression or manifestation of solar-induced energy that
    > > > > > happens to exists because of favorable conditions here on earth.
    > > > > > Life is equally superfluous as it is spontaneous.
    > > > >
    > > > > Life is self-expression. There's no physics of the self. It's hard to
    > > > > make measurements and equations when the only number you've got
    > > > > is one.
    > > >
    > > > In that sense: yes. Self-reflection is hardly admissable in the
    > > > department of science,
    > >
    > > Only if science is essentially physics. No statement is physically
    > > meaningful unless it can be expressed mathematically. Self-existence
    > > and self-reflection cannot be physical properties. It's not physics
    > > that explains the difference between life and nonlife or people and
    > > trees. If science is to tackle life, it must find its metaphysical roots.
    >
    > I don't know about this. If there exist neural correlates of
    > self-reflection and consciousness and so on the use of a
    > metaphysical agent is not necessary. Ockam's razor forbids.
    >
    > Phil.

    It depends on what you're interested in. If you want to explain the operations of the brain, you'll have no use for intrinsic or "self" existence. If, on the other hand, you want to explain the conscious life for which the brain serves as input-output system, you'll get nowhere without the inherently meta-physical concept of absolute existence.

    Ted

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 21 2002 - 07:56:19 BST