Leaderboard

Four years ago, I saw clearly that this trend in jokes was coming. It was 2020. You really can't compare Canadians and Americans. In two centuries, it's only been possible to draw one parallel between them. Canadians have more freedoms than Americans do. It's because we gave them more latitude. Things were simpler 1923 years ago. That's why we start with History 101.

This is a straw man, as I didn't claim that something "suddenly appears" at the nth step of induction. (See my words in Italics at the end of paragraph below, or re-read carefully what I said before.) Ergodicity, pressure, temperature, chemical equilibrium, planetary formation, ecosystems, degenerative syndromes, differential cell development, protein synthesis, chaperonin-regulated protein function, embyonic development, feedback mechanisms, viral population dynamics, animal behaviour, population equilibria... and all that. IOW, everything except the raw summary of the fundamental laws of Nature. None of these things can be seen in the raw equations of physics. They appear somewhere along the huge buildup of complexity from the elementary particle to swarms of billions and billions of them. But it's not like: "Now!, the adding of one particle has made it because..." It's gradual, rather. OK. I didn't claim to have answers for everything. Although it's not really so much that I have no answer for it. I never have answers for questions I do not understand. Here I have to put my foot down. Either we agree on what you mean by random, or we stop talking about this. Otherwise I might be talking about an elephant, and you be talking about a mouse --in a manner of speaking. Non-random is just a limit in a sequence of probability distributions of decreasing entropy. A probability distribution with entropy equal to the natural logarithm of the number of states is very random. A probability distribution of 10-100 entropy (just a small fraction of unity) is almost deterministic. Only at zero entropy we are at the non-random (deterministic) realm. So again, what do you mean by random? Living things have somehow "managed" to exploit regions of very, very low entropy (very non-random in that sense). Ok. If you wan to open that can of worms, it's ok. Only be aware it is a can of worms. Scenarios in which constants of physics may be changing in a much, much wider context could make a universe in which life, consciousness, etc can arise actually in an inevitable way. The possibilities are endless. Remember Haldane: IOW: What meta-conditions could make what we see as a formidable coincidence actually inevitable? This should give you pause. One man's coincidence is another (better informed) man's inevitability. If there is no mind (as a thing separate from matter) certainly there can be no mind using my mind. As Schopenhauer said, man can do what he wants, but he cannot want what he wants. Can you choose what mind you will have tomorrow at 10:30? Nah. It doesn't make sense. Mind must arise from something physical. There is enough mathematical leeway for me to think that mind is something that arises physically. The simple-minded mechanistic view of the universe is long dead and gone. Modern science does not claim full understanding. I'm assuming by "materialism" you mean that. "Pattens of behaviour in matter" is vague enough that it can include pretty much everything, so I cannot see how it could be weak. Not precise is OK, but not weak. Let me put it this way: Life (and mind, as a consequence) finds its way by following its grove. Only it is a much more intricate grove than the one found by planets and asteroids. Impossible to see by just solving an equation from any simple statement of principles.

A brain can build purpose. A neuron can't. Purpose = "intention", "aim", "meaning", etc. What you're doing here is stretching the meaning of the ordinary word to take it outside of the specific sense in which scientists and philosophers of science use it. For you it's just a synonym of "function". In that sense, of course neurons have purpose, because you use it to mean "function". No. It's not just a question of power. It'a question of different patterns, laws, and correlations arising, which a bunch of tens of neurons cannot even begin to accomplish. You tell me. I sense a big teleological explanation coming up. Random is not just anything. It has to be consistent with patterns of quantum noise. The die analogy was just that; an analogy. Here I don't understand what you say. Maybe that's why I don't get your point. What does this have to do with purpose in ants? The constants are representations of a material universe? I cannot make sense of that. Dimensionless constants are what they are 1/137 is not a representation of anything. Had it had a very different value, there would be no mind in the sense of a part of the universe trying to make sense of the whole universe. I did: You are a dualist. Your question only makes sense if there are two different realities. Namely: matter and mind. What we call mind comes from patterns of behaviour in matter. I'll answer that when you answer this: When the Earth turns around the Sun, who is doing the computing? How does the Earth know where to go next?

Doubtful. A psychotic break changes one's orientation with respect to the world and the input coming from the world. It is about distortions of perception and delusions. One might come to believe, say, that it was okay to steal a car because it belonged to a demon who was riding about distributing brain worms into innocent people. Or steal because a dark force was coercing one to do bad things. But the underlying moral sense would be less likely to change. That kind of change would more likely be due to a stroke or head trauma (Google Phineas Gage case) especially affecting the frontal lobes.