All discussions


Order

Search forums
feed for this page

 1 - 20 / 644 
2016-09-20
Does the Phineas P. Gage case show that there are two types of memory?
One emotional and the other intellectual?

2016-09-19
Electromagnetism or gravitomagnetism?
[See also  http://philpapers.org/post/20174
Halley's "Synopsis of the Astronomy of Comets", 1705, is an ingenious mathematical proof of the parabolic shape of a comet's path and fits those cosmic wanderers right into Newtonian Physics, but it does not explain how such paths are possible. We understand now the why of the famous "hypotheses non fingo", Newton could simply not start to imagine what such an explanation would have looked like. The only thing he could say was that his equations seemed to work. A cosmologist's nightmare.]

Ever since Faraday it has been understood that electricity and magnetism are inseparable. Electric current influences the magnetized needle of a compass, and the motion of a magnet can create an electrical current in a metal coil.
Gravity seems different not only because it always is attractive, but also because it is understood to be the reason why bodies not only move towards each other, but also orbit each other. And that i ... (read more)
Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/20546 Reply

2016-09-06
Kant believed that noumena was converted into phenomena, where the information from the senses is an object. By noumena he meant the 'communique' between the observer and the physical world which enables the sensing process. 
On the contrary I believe, there is no communique, all there is is sensation. However I believe there is phenomenon first and the product of sensing then becomes stored as memory. Memory of an object gives the object a permanent state. A known object as part of memory is shapeless, colorless, etc having only meaning and is senseless. Knowledge is a collection of 'thing-in-itself'.
Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/19942 Reply

2016-09-06
Most concepts in philosophy - like knowledge, consciousness, reality, or closing the explanatory gap and solving the hard problem - cannot properly be explained due to the fact that the foundations of these ideas are basically flawed. Even the Hard Problem isn't so hard - if and only if one will study and understand the origin, creation, and evolution of early information based on Information Materialization (I.M.). By utilizing the two most important foundations of IM - the Caveman in the Box and the Human Mental Handicap - the inherently flawed ideas in the study of the mind can be properly addressed. 

In his work on I.M., Lawsin coined the expression "the Human Mental Handicap" in attempt to define consciousness in its simplified form. He claimed that "No Humans can think of something without associating such something with a physical object". This simplicity of comparative association is the basic indicator that determines if one is conscious or not. If plants can hear, sm ... (read more)
Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/19862 Reply

2016-08-30
If 

(1) all atoms in a form that does consciously experience, would behave the same if individually they had the same surroundings in a form which does not. 

and 

(2) The reasons for the behaviour would be the same in both cases. 

then 

(3) What the form was consciously experiencing is not a reason for any atomic behaviour. 

because given (2) the reasons for each atom's behaviour are the same reasons as when in a form that is not consciously experiencing. 

2016-08-29

We all know Mother Nature’s gradualist ways and have coined phrases for them: “Rome was not built in a day”; “a journey of a thousand miles starts with a step”, “little drops of water make a mighty ocean”, etc. Unfortunately, some cosmologists would prefer that the universe become wealthy overnight. The universe is now 1052kg rich (i.e. about 1069J) and they want to force this wealth, our current mass estimate into the very beginning (time zero), the Planck epoch and the other early times.  Of course, Mother Nature has resisted this get-rich-quick attitude and has inflicted such versions of our Big bang model with riddles, like the flatness and singularity problems for example.

In this post, I quote from Steven Weinberg’s popular book, The First Three Minutes,

 “As the explosion continued the temperature dropped …but the temperature continued to drop, finally reaching one thousand million degrees (109K) at the end of the first three minutes. It was then cool enough for the protons and neu ... (read more)

Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/19646 Reply

2016-08-29
In two recent papers (Journal of Modern Physics (open access) http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP_2016022617412899.pdf,   http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP_2016082414553470.pdf) I have shown that a fundamentally irreversible world (deduced from a dynamic interpretation of the principle of least action) not only eliminates paradoxes in quantum physics and cosmology, but also leads to maximum entropy production (within the constraints of the systems involved) in self-organized systems. Under such conditions also information systems can self-organize to develop consciousness and mind. Mind can thus be materialistically explained as a higher (self-organized) hierarchy compared to mere computation. 
In the second paper I have given three conditions for falsification of this theory. If, on the other hand, they cannot be demonstrated the presently established scientific concept of a fundamentally time invertible, reversible world is shown to be incorrect. This has dramatic consequences for understanding o ... (read more)
Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/19642 Reply

2016-08-26
Hi everyone.

I have recently come across a novel argument that may undermine all forms of consequentialism, and accordingly wrote a paper elaborating on that argument. I now wish to get it peer-reviewed by the experts in this area. Kindly guide on the best course of action I should follow. Thanks!

2016-08-22
Hi,I'm looking for a good book/article that analyzes the concept of continuum (not just in space and time but on the general level, including properties, numbers etc.) and surveys its definitions.
I'll be grateful for your references.
Thanks,
Benny
Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/19362 Reply

2016-08-22
The title of this piece is "Problems of Conflict," not "Problems of Conduct," and it occupies pp. 892-893, not just p. 892. (It is a letter to the editor responding to an essay by Evelyn Underhill; it discusses pacificism in the context of World War I.)

The author was a Quaker, pacifist, and educator (part of the National Adult Schools Movement in the United Kingdom). She was also one of Gilbert Ryle's older siblings.

2016-08-08
After the publication of this paper, I enjoyed personal communication with Aloysius Martinich and discovered that I misused if and only if in several places of this paper. The corrections are below:

The formula indicates the following:
1. A is relatively identical to the value, but A is not absolutely identical to the value.
2. B is relatively identical to the value, but B is not absolutely identical to the value.
3. The value of A is absolutely identical to the value of B.
4. A is not identical to B.
(page 135)

1. The expression 1 + 3 is relatively identical to the value 4, but 1 + 3 is not absolutely identical to 4.

2. The expression 2 + 2 is relatively identical to the value 4, but 2 + 2 is not absolutely identical to 4.
3. The value of 1 + 3 is absolutely identical to the value of 2 + 2.
4. The expression 1 + 3 is not identical to the expression 2 + 2.
(page 135)

1. The triumvir was relatively identical to Lepidus, but the triumvir was not absolutely identical to Lepidus.
2. The pontifex maximus ... (read more)


2016-08-02
THE INTEGRAL TEXT
I describe a novel textual structure which gave rise to the so-called analytic/continental divide, and which describes the origin and nature of divides in general.
 
The source of the analytic-continental divide is organizational and not conceptual, the divide arising as a consequence of the structure of the University "text". This structure I refer to as the "integral text". It is a tangible, self-referring structure through which the University stores knowledge and retains influence. (Those who wish to grasp the main conjecture quickly can move straight to the description of the integral text, about half-way through this essay.)

I develop the model of the integral text to describe both the structure through which an interpretive community fixes knowledge within its institutional repository and the way in which this structure restricts and promotes communication and academic influence.The integral text is not itself a body of knowledge, but a single, indivisible structur ... (read more)
Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/18678 Reply

2016-07-20



This thread has been abusively deleted. The Philpapers Team offered me the opportunity to restore it.

"How many threads do you need to restore? Combining multiple posts into one would be a way to get around the limitation on 2 posts, and would also be less work for you. Since they were previously accepted, we'll make sure to accept them if you notify us ahead of time with the subject heading." The PhilPapers Team

]

1 What is the goal of vision, and does it need one?
The problem of the teleological approach is that it assumes that which still is not and cannot be known: clear vision. How can the brain have as goal the elimination of obstacles to clear vision, through, among other, all kinds of ocular movements, if clear vision is itself the result of these movements? As we shall see, many visual phenomena has been approached under this naive perspective, with many complex theories as a result.
If, like I claim, clear vision can never be the goal of the visual system, but only its effect, tha ... (read more)

Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/18194 Reply

2016-07-20
It seems to me that this work is very much unavailable to students and professionals. Have not found it online in any form, save for a few hardcover editions for more than $500. Crazy.

2016-07-11

In a recent article “From Sexuality to Eroticism: The Making of the Human Mind” http://www.scirp.org/journal/AA/ I describe a new scenario for human evolution. Besides the well known topics of upright gait and explorative curiosity I dwell on the realm of erotic life. I do this in accordance with Owen Lovejoy’s pair-bonding hypothesis of human origins. In consequence of their upright gait early humans practiced frontal eye-to-eye copulation. In the beginning this was merely random and took place in the horde. But some females may have felt better with a specific male and thus looked for intimate relations with him. Here begins a sort of “emotional selection”, different from mere sexual selection for good genes. Through long-term bonds erotic feelings are intensified and extended onto higher-order emotions such as hope and jealousy. This scenario is confirmed by the fact that the development of the large brain of humans seems to be more in relation to emotional development than to techn ... (read more)

Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/17694 Reply

2016-07-08
I have come across a strange discrepancy between the claims of Simon Stevin and Einstein concerning gravitation. Well, the first is a classic thinker of the 16-17th century, while Einstein is a prodigy of the 20th. So, why should it be a problem? But then, this is not my area of expertise and I would like very much to hear from people on the know.I would greatly appreciate comments on the following post:
http://philpapers.org/post/17566

Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/17602 Reply

2016-07-07
[

This thread has been abusively deleted. The Philpapers Team offered me the opportunity to restore it.

"How many threads do you need to restore? Combining multiple posts into one would be a way to get around the limitation on 2 posts, and would also be less work for you. Since they were previously accepted, we'll make sure to accept them if you notify us ahead of time with the subject heading." The PhilPapers Team

]

1 Turing and the Myth of Universality

There is a strong, not to say absolute belief in the consistency of Turing's thesis, which can be, informally, expressed as such: what a computer can do, any other computer can.

Let us start with the simplest expression of all:

1) 0+1=1

It will be obvious to anyone that any computer worth its silicone, or any other material substrate, will be able to compute (1).

What does that say about universal computing?

Well, that's just it, really. It does not say anything at all. All it shows is that, once the problem has been solved, or at least, put ... (read more)

Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/17546 Reply

2016-07-07
The real materialism states that "all scientific laws are inherent to the matter itself".
It is these laws that, for billions of years (at least 13) determine the causal evolution of the atomOs (atomOs of Democritos&alii), and thus determines the causal evolution of photons, so the agglomerated material, so the causal evolution of living matter and therefore the causal evolution of human society.
So we can say that the laws of biology are inherent in the laws of physics. They are only summaries of these basic laws.
As a result, physics and biology have a common body of scientific laws - they are what we will call "philosophical laws."
These laws obviously add to the laws of knowledge (epistemological laws)
So we will call "materiological laws" these laws that will add to the "epistemological laws" to form the set of "philosophical laws."
The first materiological laws - so a law common to physics and biology - is the law of transformation quantity quality  law.-(LTQQ)
It was discovered by Hegel ... (read more)

2016-07-05
[

This thread has been abusively deleted. The Philpapers Team offered me the opportunity to restore it.

"How many threads do you need to restore? Combining multiple posts into one would be a way to get around the limitation on 2 posts, and would also be less work for you. Since they were previously accepted, we'll make sure to accept them if you notify us ahead of time with the subject heading." The PhilPapers Team

]


1 Hearing

George: I hate ears!
me: You sound just like Hate-Smurf. You did not mind the semi-circular canals, so why hate ears?
George: I don't mind the canals, in fact I love them. They're really fun. Any time you move your head I get to whoosh from one pool to the other!
me: And riding the basilar membrane, that's not fun? That's just like a trampoline, isn't it?
George: Yeah, I guess it is. Or at least it would be, if I could play the drums instead of having them bellowing in my head!
me: I don't understand.
George: Of course you don't. You're not supposed to. It's a h ... (read more)

Latest replies: Permanent link: http://philpapers.org/post/17418 Reply

 1 - 20 / 644