Tag Info

New answers tagged

5

Lee Smolin doesn't mean that the most fundemental physical theory can have no symmetry. What he means is that symmetry shouldn't be the guiding principle in discerning fundemental physical theories. While symmetry is mathematically useful, it doesn't provide a sufficient reason to accept a theory, this goes back to Leibniz's principle of sufficient reason. ...


0

Your question is a valid one and the missing piece of information that both answers your question and justifies the study of physics itself is a reductionist postulate to the effect that valid explanations of the most basic and most decomposed parts and behaviors of a system can be built into an explanation for all the system's behaviors and emergent ...


1

TOE is supposed to be a theory that explains everything microscopically, on the smallest and most fundamental levels. It doesn't bother with consciousness because that is a macroscopic phenomenon. Theoretically, with a TOE, we can explain consciousness, but in practice it would still be difficult.


4

The question is a possibility on both sites; though on Phil.SE you're more likely to get a wider range of answers. If one accepts the physicalist view then mind is said to be an emergent phenomena as @danu mentions; but a more careful view suggests that bulk properties as heat are emergent - in that a definite physical mechanism can be shown ie through ...


-1

To move forward with just about anything we must first need to take the leap that reality exists independently of our mind. This is something that we can, by definition, never prove one way or another, but since we cannot travel down the "reality is a dream" road, it only makes sense to go down the road that we can actually explore. Getting past that, ...



Top 50 recent answers are included