Pelican Parts Forums - Reality isn't 'Real'...

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)

- Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/)

- - Reality isn't 'Real'... (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/916119-reality-isnt-real.html)

Reality isn't 'Real'...

Interesting article. Essentially we really have little clue about what is 'real' due to our assumptions and limitations. The author begs the question 'are we machines?' It is not a new question but he includes quantum physics into the argument. Its a good read.

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20160421-the-evolutionary-argument-against-reality/

After a cursory look at this article, I'm reminded it may be be a good idea to re-read "The Anthropic Cosmological Principle" - this time - without any distractions. Thanks "Doc".

Cheers
JB

So he is saying that we are spiritual beings having a human experience in a magical universe.

More or less.

with an algorithm to prove it...

It will be interesting to see what various peoples reactions are to this Thread?

Maybe Nostatic should chime in on this one and give us his take?

Not sure how I feel about this...

Quote:

Here’s a concrete example. We have two hemispheres in our brain. But when you do a split-brain operation, a complete transection of the corpus callosum, you get clear evidence of two separate consciousnesses. Before that slicing happened, it seemed there was a single unified consciousness. So it’s not implausible that there is a single conscious agent.

That seems like a bit of a leap. He went from hemispheres, to consciousnesses. When you do an operation with your left hand, and an operation with your right hand, there aren't two bodies.

Also, what does he mean by...

Quote:

According to evolution by natural selection, an organism that sees reality as it is will never be more fit than an organism of equal complexity that sees none of reality but is just tuned to fitness. Never.

Is he being literal? So an organism that sees none of reality, recognizes the "fitness" of a "train". The organism sees none of reality, and only fitness, and thus knows to avoid the train, but because because it cannot see reality, it cannot gauge the width of the train. The organism than gets hit by the train because it can't judge the reality of the train and its size. If we assume that the organism tuned to fitness can recognize how far away to stand from the train as to maximize survival, it would have to have some perception of reality.

Seems like the optimal organism has to be able to do both, kinda like us. We can recognize certain "real" properties, and have a fitness gauge.

Am I misunderstanding?

When they discovered black holes it was interesting. Now with god particles , spooky science etc we know that we know nothing.
A Particle that is not there till we look, or does the same thing 1000 miles away as its sister particle is very challenging to what we think we knew.
These discoveries are very challenging and more challenging as to what we really are.
We can postulate how or if we all could fit on the end of a pin, but that still does not answer the bigger questions.
Who is in charge? What is scale size? How do seemingly innocuous bits and pieces have intelligence?

Methinks this Hoffman cat is lost in his own reality.

dude's dabb'n some fine BHO...

He is like a character in a Cheech and Chong movie.

Quote:

It’s not that there’s a classical brain that does some quantum magic. It’s that there’s no brain!