Does consciousness play a fundamental role according to contemporary physics?

[Gambit]

Does consciousness play a fundamental role according to contemporary physics?

It would appear that consciousness plays a fundamental role in the theory of (special) relativity because the theory requires the reference frame of the observer be taken into account.

It would appear that consciousness plays a fundamental role in quantum mechanics because the role of the observer must be taken into account in order resolve the measurement problem.

What sayeth you?

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Does consciousness play a fundamental role according to contemporary physics?

So far as we are able to determine, it is absolutely essential. To date, no progress in contemporary physics has ever been made by an unconscious physicist, and it is generally agreed that only physicists who are conscious are able to contribute to modern physics.

 

[Gambit]

So far as we are able to determine, it is absolutely essential.

Agreed. The idea that an objective world exists independently of all subjectivity is a patently false one.

 

[Bunyip]

Agreed. The idea that an objective world exists independently of all subjectivity is a patently false one.

What? You are denying that reality is real? So let me get this straight - you think materialists deny the existence of the 'spiritual' and only accept the physical; but you deny the existence of the physical?

Surely that is a far less tenable position?

I would think that accepting the physical is real and questioning the 'reality' of 'spirit' makes far more sense than denying that the physical is real?

 

[Gambit]

Agreed. The idea that an objective world exists independently of all subjectivity is a patently false one.

What? You are denying that reality is real?

I suggest you reread my post. I never argued that reality is not real. (Reality is real by definition.)

 

[Bunyip]

I suggest you reread my post. I never argued that reality is not real. (Reality is real by definition.)

You said the whole idea that an objective world (reality) exists independently of all subjectivity is patently false, you are denying the existence of reality.

 

[Gambit]

You said the whole idea that an objective world (reality) exists independently of all subjectivity is patently false, you are denying the existence of reality.

I am not denying the existence of reality. I am rejecting the (materialist) idea that it is possible for an objective world to exist independently of all subjectivity.

 

[Bunyip]

I am not denying the existence of reality. I am rejecting the idea that it is possible for an objective world to exist independently of all subjectivity.

Which would be something you could not possibly either know or evidence. The objective universe existed long before there were conscious beings.

 

[Gambit]

Which would be something you could not possibly either know or evidence.

I provided evidence in the OP of this thread to support my claim.

 

[Bunyip]

I provided evidence in the OP of this thread to support my claim.

But that doesn't support your claim - it is just a misconception. Your claim is not evidenceable, by definition.

 

[Gambit]

But that doesn't support your claim - it is just a misconception. Your claim is not evidencable, by definition.

What the heck is "evidencable?"

 

[Bunyip]

What the heck is "evidencable?"

Evidenceable. Amazed that threw you, just a simple typo.

What you are claiming is not knowable, it can not be evidenced.

 

[Gambit]

Evidenceable. Amazed that threw you, just a simple typo.

It threw me off because "evidenceable" is not a word (at least not in the English language). Perhaps you mean "evidential?"

 

[Bunyip]

It threw me off because "evidenceable" is not a word (at least not in the English language). Perhaps you mean "evidential?"

I mean 'can not be evidenced'.

 

[Gambit]

I mean 'can not be evidenced'.

That's not what you wrote.

 

[Bunyip]

That's not what you wrote.

I have now cleared it up twice - Your claim can not possibly be evidenced.

 

[Gambit]

I have now cleared it up twice - Your claim can not possibly be evidenced.

The theory of relativity and quantum mechanics support my claim for reasons already stated in the OP.

 

[Bunyip]

The theory of relativity and quantum mechanics support my claim for reasons already stated in the OP.

Actually no they don't. They do not in any way argue for your claim, your claim can not be evidenced. Funny how none of the physicists studying relativity and QM have drawn the same inference that you have.

 

[Gambit]

Actually no they don't. They do not in any way argue for your claim, your claim can not be evidenced. Funny how none of the physicists studying relativity and QM have drawn the same inference that you have.

Eugene Wigner (Nobel laureate in physics) said: "It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness." (source: "Symmetries and Reflections" by Eugene Wigner)

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

It would appear that consciousness plays a fundamental role in quantum mechanics because the role of the observer must be taken into account in order resolve the measurement problem.

What sayeth you?

The same thing I did before. You misunderstood a popular science book which begins with the line "This book is controversial" and there are very few physicists who believe that the measurement problem or quantum physics has anything to do with consciousness, as for one thing it would imply that quantum mechanical processes didn't exist until conscious beings did, and that quantum mechanical processes only exist where conscious beings are there to observe them. Neither is true.