[removed]

This guy writes for Philosophy Now magazine.

The brain is always telling itself it's important... what an egotistical ass.

I use my butt!

Can you clarify what you mean "sum up the consciousness and awareness"?

The picture: Sainte-Geneviève Library in Quartier Latin, Paris

[removed]

I mean... there is plenty unique enough about the human brain. You can demarcate humans from the rest of the animal kingdom at multiple levels.

>It can have features that are inexplicable in parts. Subatomic particles are a great example of that.

Potentially. But before recent times, entire sun was inexplicable. The human heart was inexplicable. The motion of the wind and waves was inexplicable.

You're putting forth a modified God of the gaps arguement.

..... which is reduced to our brains and biology

> When philosophers, humanities, religion, or witch doctor step into the realm of science

Uhh you know that the scientific method came from philosophy right?

>Can we reduce the wave to a single, immutable part? No

I'm glad we ended on the same page.

>The whole being the sum of its parts does not mean that the whole has features that are ... inexplicable in parts.

It can have features that are inexplicable in parts. Subatomic particles are a great example of that.

>Wave is a physical motion of the molecules in a pattern of wave.

Yeah. If I wave my arms in the air, it's just a blip. If I'm in a stadium and raise my arms in sync with others so that we create a wave around the arena, that's a wave. The wave is not any one of us, but a collective effort of individual parts orchestrated in a particular way.

Can we reduce the wave to a single, immutable part? No. But we can't even do that for atoms. The whole being the sum of its parts does not mean that the whole has features that are mysterious or inexplicable in parts.

Lol exactly. “Ah finally an answer to a question no one asked”

I am so frustrated with my own family being so politically committed to viciously attack everything and anything our president does, to a point in which they cannot accept evidence, out of their ideological hate for a politician. Sheer gut. I am very sensible, and it stresses me so much feeling their hate, it makes me literally sick.
So much irrationality. They are all women, it is weird tho.

Yeah pal: Our culture makes art, has serial killers, mass war, fetishes, professions, shite novels, good novels, podiatry, deep sea diving, biscuits, deliberate genocide, manufactured sausages, algorithms, dutchness, the wheel, touching your toe as a measure of fitness, shame, regret, football teams. Engineering. Not the same.

>In what sense is the wave not reducible to the physical motion of the molecules?

Generalized enough everything can be described as a transfer of energy. If you accept that 'transfer of energy' can serve as the definition of any process (wave, fire, typing comments on Reddit), then we are on the same page, and we now have universal and useless theory of everything.

But if you insist that we cannot generalize like that because it omits important differences, then I repeat again: physical motion of the molecules is not a wave. Wave is a physical motion of the molecules in a pattern of wave.

>I hate you organ supremacists

Indeed. A piano is just as good, if not better.

Ah yeah, the old straight-edge mineralist. What's next? Are you going to force feed us the ol' panpsychism propaganda?

[deleted]

A pattern can't be a property of a single molecule because patterns, by definition, involve repetition in space or time or both.

But so what?

In what sense is the wave not reducible to the physical motion of the molecules? Every molecule that you conceive of is being part of the wave is simply bouncing around in its environment and responding to the forces to which it is subjected. As it happens, if you have a bunch of molecules in a fluid and you provide a particular external intervention, you can make the molecules move in a repetitive way. Are you saying that somehow creates a new entity that can't be explained by looking at its parts? If so, how many particles do I need to create a wave? Actually, even a single particle can oscillate in a wave. If you trace the time history of a single molecule in the ocean as a wave passes over it, you will see the wave in the motion of that molecule. So what is new when you have a bunch of them doing it at the same time?

>It's our culture that makes us unique

>- social structure,

Uh, wolves are highly social. Bees and ants are eusocial. That is, MORE social than humans. We don't have a monopoly on social structures at all.

>language

Bees dance location data to each other. Birds sing and communicate. We've taught English to apes. Yeah, this one is bollocks too.

> psychology

Any psychology? I mean, anything with a brain has some psychology to it.

NONE of that makes us unique. What, you going to try and say "tool use" next? You're about 70-100 years behind on this debate. Humans are just another animal. It's just egocentrism telling you otherwise.

EDIT:

WOW.

You abuse the moderation system to just censor posts you don't like? That's low man. Real low. It's the rules here to actually argue your position. If you just can't stand someone disagreeing with you, then this sub isn't for you.

The world is pretty unequivocally not all in the mind. Arguments like that seek to make up a majority of the reason a lot of people look down on philosophy

If you watch his podcast with Lex Friedman he doesn’t really make this claim. I would have to listen back but he doesn’t come to a complete conclusion as he is asked about the nature va nurture debate in it as well. Unless he’s updated the way he explains it in more recent talks since.

I hate you organ supremacists. I prefer to experience reality through the use of minerals and the occasional alpha particle emission, and your organ-based propaganda isn’t going to win me over