New thread: Mathematical truth

From: George Andrews Jr. (gandrews@as.wm.edu)
Date: Wed Sep 05 2001 - 12:39:38 EDT

  • Next message: george murphy: "Re: New thread: Mathematical truth/God's limitations"

    Hi James;

    I split this thread since there are two subjects: math and mass.

    > > James W Stark wrote:
    > >>
    > >> In my worldview reality consists of a physical universe
    > >> (matter), a mental world, (our awareness of the laws of
    > >> mathematics as well as any subject matter.), and the
    > >> spiritual realm (known to us through our consciousness.)
    > >>
    > > Are not our minds an epiphenomenan of our brains and therefore belong to
    > > your first category of physical? i.e. mental activity =
    > > electrical/chemical activity = subsets of physical phenomena.
    >
    > No, I do not see the mind as an epiphenomenona. Such a reductionistic view
    > does not have sufficient explanatory power. The mind and brain are
    > independent worlds connected through human consciousness. The brain is
    > deterministic in structure, but the mind embraces decision agents that can
    > use free will, which is not a program.
    > >

    With respect, the brain is physical; the information processed and stored in it
    is by definition epiphenomenal. This is supported by the fact that when we
    forget (information loss) or when we learn (info. gain), the brain's
    electromagnetic patterns are observed to change. Hence, I must insist that
    epiphenomenalism is robust in its explanatory power and that the compartmental
    trichodomy of brain, mind and consciousness is in fact lacking. One may view
    this as reductionism, but I prefer to see it as unification. I am also problem
    by you notion of connected independence; connected entities are by definition
    not independent. Finally, experiments on the human brain which produce
    emotional/religious response certainly also succumb to an epiphenomenal
    explanation for the human mind.

    The notion of freewill isn't really a problem when striped of its absoluteness;
    we are simply not free to do or think or be anything. Decision making can be
    thought of as algorithmically optimization.... or something like that :-).

    Got to go! I'll reply about mass on another thread if you should like to
    continue on that topic.
    Thanks for the discourse.
    George A.

    --
    George A. Andrews Jr.
    Physics/Applied Science
    College of William & Mary
    P.O. Box 8795
    Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 05 2001 - 12:36:49 EDT