[MD] Quantum Enigma

[John Carl]

Hey, DT,

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:31 AM, David Thomas <combinedefforts at earthlink.net
> wrote:



>
> I do think though that attempts by science and philosophy to simultaneously
> solve the "hard problems" of "Quantum Enigma" and "Consciousness Enigma"
> are
> doomed to fail philosophically until the science in both fields advances.


Well the advances science needs to make are philosophical, metaphysical
advances.  I'm not sure scientific advances would help philosophy much,
since the "scientific" as we know it is built upon a shaky foundation.




> I
> also think part of the reason behind the claim that "philosophy is dead" is
> that the specialized areas of science are so varied and technically
> difficult in the domains of the "hard problems" that no individual
> philosopher, short of a savant, can acquire the detailed depth of
> understanding necessary in each of the scientific fields required to be
> able
> to integrate their advances into a coherent whole. It will have to be a
> combined effort.
>


I disagree.  First, I disagree with anyone who says philosophy is dead.  I
mean, duh, that's a very philosophically significant statement - and thus a
blatant self-contradiction, to start with.  But more to the point, I think
the "hard problems" can be solved easily, with the right frame of mind.  The
only problem then, is bringing scientists to the right frame of mind. Early
education would help in the future.   Late education for the elderly would
help in the now.  But either way, education is the key, no matter how you
look at it, and knowing the key, the question is how to craft it.

I notice a lot of contributors to this list are committed to the teaching
profession or related to it, in one way or another.  So for the most part,
by my judgement, you're fundamentally on the right path.  How then to make
the path straight -   taking out the jogs and meanderings and pot-holes -
seems to be the troublesome part of the process.

John the pot hole.