For Graviphoton

[bascule]

You certainly have the roads you want to go down picked out. I've already been there, and can recommend some reading for you that you might find extremely interesting. Personally I consider these people crackpots, but I think you'd get a kick out of them:

 

John Searle: Famous for his "Chinese Room" thought experiment which attempts a reductio ad absurdum against functionalism. Proponent of "biological naturalism," the idea that consciousness arose naturally but can only be a property of biological systems.

 

Christopher Michael Langan: Famous for his high IQ, and a proponent of the "Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe", or CTMU (pronounced cat mew). His model suggests that mind has an integral structural role in the universe, with the end result of mind's role in the universe being God and God being the universe's creator, albeit in a somewhat Deist capacity, as he does not purport that God still exists or has existed at all since creation. Believes God is the creator of a Self-Configuring Self-Processing Language which lies at the heart of the universe's operation. Has thus far only managed to publish his model in Intelligent Design journals and has not received publication elsewhere. While he publishes through ID journals he should not be considered a cdesign proponentist as his ideas are wholly compatible with existing science. However, they are anything but scientific.

[Graviphoton]

Look, i don't know who you think you are trying to kid. I bet you don't even have any degree in physics, never mind working in the mainstream. I could talk about subjects that would be way over your head, but you treat me as if i am some knowledgless crack-pot wannabe.

 

I am now glad, i am choosing to leave this place.

[bascule]

Look, i don't know who you think you are trying to kid.

 

I was trying to point you at some information I thought you might find interesting. For some reason this has put you on the defensive... however this was intended as a helpful post, directing you towards resources you might find interesting.

 

I bet you don't even have any degree in physics, never mind working in the mainstream.

 

Searle is a proponent of the idea that quantum indeterminism is integral to consciousness, although I've never read him proposing a mechanism by which it does so. Christopher Michael Langan's hypotheses greatly transcend the kinds of things even modern physics is able to describe. Other than that I don't see the relevance of physics to this thread. And for the record: no, I don't have a physics degree.

 

I could talk about subjects that would be way over your head, but you treat me as if i am some knowledgless crack-pot wannabe.

 

I am quite likely the most knowledgeable person on this board on the subject of the philosophy of mind and consciousness studies. I was trying to point you at resources you might find interesting, even though I personally dislike the opinions of these individuals (though I have read them as I consider analyzing contrarian opinions as central to understanding anything).

 

I'd still suggest you investigate these people. They're onto the same ideas you are.

[ydoaPs]

Do you have a degree?

[Graviphoton]

No. I don't have a degree. I am currently working for my National Diploma.

[Klaynos]

This weeks newscientist cover story:

 

Is this a unified theory of the brain?

 

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19826586.100-is-this-a-unified-theory-of-the-brain.html