标记档案: philsophy of mind

What is Unreal Blog?

告诉我们一些关于为什么你开始你的博客, 和什么让你这件事的动机.

由于我的文章开始出现在不同的杂志和报纸, 常规列, 我想收集他们在一个地方 — 随着互联网的一种选集, 因为它是. 这是我的博客是如何诞生. 继续写博客的动机来自于如何我的第一本书的记忆, 虚幻宇宙, 初具规模出来的散记,我开始写在废旧书. 我认为,跨任何人的脑海里时常被人遗忘和丢失,除非它们都写下来的想法. 博客是一个方便的平台把他们失望. 和, 因为博客是相当公开, 你采取一些照顾和精力来表达自己好.

你有什么打算博客的未来?

我会继续写博客, 大约在一个星期一个职位左右的速度. 我没有对博客本身有什么大计划, 但我确实有一些其他的互联网的想法,可能春天从我的博客.

哲学通常被视为一个非常高的概念, 知识产权主题. 你认为它可以在整个世界的影响更大?

这是一个问题,困扰了我一段时间. 我写 上一个帖子, 它可以回答这个问题,尽我的能力. 重复自己有点, 哲学只是什么知识的追求,我们尽情享受的说明. 这只是我们不经常这么认为. 例如, 如果你正在做物理, 你认为你是很远从哲学中删除. 那你把物理学理论的哲学自旋主要是一种事后的想法, 据信. 但有些情况下,你其实可以 应用 理念,以解决物理问题, 并提出了新的理论. 这的确是我的书的主题, 虚幻宇宙. 它要求的问题, 如果某个对象飞过比光速更快, 会是什么模样? 随着最近的发现,即 固体物质确实比光更快, 我觉得自己平反,并期待着在物理学的进一步发展.

你觉得不少大学生慕名理念? 是什么让他们选择主修它?

在今天的世界, 恐怕理念是超级无关. 因此,它可能很难让我们的青少年对哲学感兴趣. 我觉得我们可以希望通过指出任何的是,我们做的和互连的智力方面背后,以提高其相关性. 这会让他们选择主修它? 在这个世界上被过度驱动, 它可能是不够. 然后再, 它是世界上清晰度常被误认为是成就. 也许,哲学能够帮助你更好地表达, 听起来真的很酷,打动了女孩,你已经经过 — 说句不好听.

更为严重的是, 虽然, 我所说的关于哲学的不相关性可以说一下, 说, 物理学以及, 尽管它给你的电脑和iPad. 例如, 当哥白尼提出了这样的观念:地球围绕着太阳,而不是倒过来, 深刻的,虽然这个启示是, 以什么方式是改变我们的日常生活? 你真的需要知道这条信息给你的生活? 这种深刻的事实和理论这无关困扰科学家,如理查德·费曼.

你会给人谁是对哲学感兴趣什么样的意见或建议, 和谁愿意开始学习更多关于它的?

我通过物理开始了我的道路走向哲学. 我认为哲学本身是其他任何东西,你不能真正开始使用它太超然. 你必须找到自己的方式向它无论你的工作包括, 然后从那里展开. 至少, 这就是我是如何做到的, 而这种方式使得它非常真实. 当你问自己这样一个问题 什么是空间 (这样就可以了解它的意思是说,太空合同, 例如), 你得到的答案是非常相关的. 他们不是一些哲学乱码. 我想类似的路径相关性在各个领域存在. 例如参见如何 Pirsig 带出了质量的概念在他的工作, 不再是一个抽象的定义, 但作为一个全消耗 (并最终危险) 痴迷.

In my view, 哲学是围绕人类努力的多个孤岛包装. 它可以帮助你看到各种看似不相关的领域的联系, such as 认知神经科学与狭义相对论. 什么实际的用途是这方面的知识, 我不能告诉你. 然后再, 什么实际用途是生活本身?

Dualism

After being called one of the 顶 50 philosophy bloggers, I feel almost obliged to write another post on philosophy. This might vex Jat who, while appreciating the post on my first car, was somewhat less than enthusiastic about my deeper thoughts. Also looking askance at my philosophical endeavors would be a badminton buddy of mine who complained that my posts on death scared the bejesus out of him. 但, 我能说什么, I have been listening to a lot of philosophy. I listened to the lectures by Shelly Kagan on just that dreaded topic of death, and by John Searle (再) on the philosophy of mind.

Listening to these lectures filled me with another kind of dread. I realized once again how ignorant I am, and how much there is to know, think and figure out, and how little time is left to do all that. Perhaps this recognition of my ignorance is a sign of growing wisdom, if we can believe Socrates. At least I hope it is.

One thing I had some misconceptions about (or an incomplete understanding of) was this concept of dualism. Growing up in India, I heard a lot about our monistic philosophy called 不二. The word means not-two, and I understood it as the rejection of the Brahman and Maya distinction. 为了用一个例子来说明吧, say you sense something — like you see these words in front of you on your computer screen. Are these words and the computer screen out there really? If I were to somehow generate the neuronal firing patterns that create this sensation in you, you would see these words even if they were not there. This is easy to understand; 毕竟, this is the main thesis of the movie Matrix. So what you see is merely a construct in your brain; it is Maya or part of the Matrix. What is causing the sensory inputs is presumably Brahman. 所以, to me, Advaita meant trusting only the realness of Brahman while rejecting Maya. 现在, after reading a bit more, I’m not sure that was an accurate description at all. Perhaps that is why Ranga criticized me long time ago.

In Western philosophy, there is a different and more obvious kind of dualism. It is the age-old mind-matter distinction. What is mind made of? Most of us think of mind (those who think of it, 就是说) as a computer program running on our brain. 换句话说, mind is software, brain is hardware. They are two different kinds of things. 毕竟, we pay separately for hardware (Dell) and software (Microsoft). Since we think of them as two, ours is an inherently dualistic view. Before the time of computers, Descartes thought of this problem and said there was a mental substance and a physical substance. So this view is called Cartesian Dualism. (顺便说说, Cartesian coordinates in analytic geometry came from Descartes as well — a fact that might enhance our respect for him.) It is a view that has vast ramifications in all branches of philosophy, from metaphysics to theology. It leads to the concepts of spirit and souls, 神, afterlife, reincarnation etc., with their inescapable implications on morality.

There are philosophers who reject this notion of Cartesian dualism. John Searle is one of them. They embrace a view that mind is an emergent property of the brain. An emergent property (more fancily called an epiphenomenon) is something that happens incidentally along with the main phenomenon, but is neither the cause nor the effect of it. An emergent property in physics that we are familiar with is temperature, which is a measure of the average velocity of a bunch of molecules. You cannot define temperature unless you have a statistically significant collection of molecules. Searle uses the wetness of water as his example to illustrate emergence of properties. You cannot have a wet water molecule or a dry one, but when you put a lot of water molecules together you get wetness. 同样, mind emerges from the physical substance of the brain through physical processes. So all the properties that we ascribe to mind are to be explained away as physical interactions. There is only one kind of substance, which is physical. So this monistic philosophy is called physicalism. Physicalism is part of materialism (not to be confused with its current meaning — what we mean by a material girl, 例如).

You know, 该 trouble with philosophy is that there are so many isms that you lose track of what is going on in this wild jungle of jargonism. If I coined the word unrealism to go with my blog and promoted it as a branch of philosophy, or better yet, a Singaporean school of thought, I’m sure I can make it stick. Or perhaps it is already an accepted domain?

All kidding aside, the view that everything on the mental side of life, such as consciousness, thoughts, ideals etc., is a manifestation of physical interactions (I’m restating the definition of physicalism here, as you can see) enjoys certain currency among contemporary philosophers. Both Kagan and Searle readily accept this view, 例如. But this view is in conflict with what the ancient Greek philosophers like Socrates, Plato and Aristotle thought. They all believed in some form of continued existence of a mental substance, be it the soul, spirit or whatever. All major religions have some variant of this dualism embedded in their beliefs. (I think Plato’s dualism is of a different kind — a real, imperfect world where we live on the one hand, and an ideal perfect world of forms on the other where the souls and Gods live. More on that later.) 毕竟, God has to be made up of a spiritual “substance” other than a pure physical substance. Or how could he not be subject to the physical laws that we, mere mortals, can comprehend?

Nothing in philosophy is totally disconnected from one another. A fundamental stance such as dualism or monism that you take in dealing with the questions on consciousness, cognition and mind has ramifications in what kind of life you lead (Ethics), how you define reality (Metaphysics), 如何 you know these things (Epistemology). Through its influence on religions, it may even impact our political power struggles of our troubled times. If you think about it long enough, you can connect the dualist/monist distinction even to aesthetics. 毕竟, Richard Pirsig did just that in his 禅与摩托车维修艺术.

As they say, if the only tool you have is a hammer, all problems begin to look like nails. My tool right now is philosophy, so I see little philosophical nails everywhere.

Mind over Matter

当我想要写的东西 (这篇博客文章, 例如), 我拿起我的笔,并开始在我的笔记本做这些弯弯曲曲的符号, 我键入到博客以后. 简单, 每天的事情, 右边? 但我怎么办呢? 我的意思是, 我怎么做物理变化, 物质的物质世界由我非物质心灵的纯粹意志或意向?

这听起来像一个非常愚蠢的问题, 我知道. 当你想要写一个幸福的帖子, 你只要拿起一个幸福的笔,写有福的事 (运用 “保佑” 以同样的方式乌比戈德堡用它在她的电影之一). 有什么好奇怪或哲学一下吧? 这正是我会在心灵哲学读了一些东西,以前一个星期前说:.

究竟如何做我写? 笔是由物质. 它不动它自己的意志,使字. 我们从物理学知道. 我们需要一个原因. 当然, 这是我的手正在移动它, 由一组精确的电 - 化学反应的控制. 什么原因造成的反应? 神经元在我的大脑罚款 — 再, 在物质世界的互动. 和是什么原因导致神经元放电的特别精确模式? 这是, 当然, 我脑海. 我的神经元发射响应自己心中的想法和文字.

等一下, 不会这么快出现, 跳跳! 我的心是不是一个物理实体. 我们可以对心灵或意识的大多数物理或物质声明的是,它是大脑的状态 — 或神经元点火的模式. 我打算写几个字又是某些神经元发射一个空间和时间安排 — 仅此而已. 这样的图案如何导致在物理变化, 物质世界?

我们不觉得这是问题,所以百思不得其解,因为我们一直在做永远. 所以,我们不要让自己被它感到惊讶 — 除非我们有点疯狂. 但这个问题是很现实. 需要注意的是,如果我的写作意图只在我的想象造成了我写, 我们没有问题. 无论是事业 (意向) 和效果 (想象力) 是非材料. 与这种思路确实提供了一个解决方案,以原来的问题 — 姑且认为一切都在一个人的头脑. 没有什么是真的. 一切 Maya, 只有一个人的头脑中存在. 这是唯我论的深渊. 作为哲学立场, 这种想法是一致的,甚至实践. 我写了松散的基础上的概念一本书,没有什么是真正的 — 并形象地称为它 虚幻宇宙.

不幸, 唯我论,是完全错误. 当我说, “一切都在我的脑海, 没有别的是真实的,” 你不得不说的是, “我同意, I hear you!” 和吊杆, 我错了! 对于如果您同意, 至少有一个更多的头脑比我的其他.

因此,唯我论作为解决这一难题,在一记非物质意图可以让世界上的物理变化是不尽如人意. 那么其他的解决方案, 当然, 是说,意向是虚幻. 自由意志不存在; 这只是我们的凭空想象. 换句话说, 我真的不打算写这个帖子, 这一切都是注定. 这只是后 - 事实, 我种属性自由意志,并假装我的意思去做.

奇怪,因为它看起来, 也有一些明显的迹​​象表明这种说法可能是正确的. 我会写另一篇文章 (有或没有自由意志) 一一列举.

在思考意识和大脑的当前视图是在比喻数字计算机. 心灵是一个程序 (软件), 而大脑是一台电脑 (硬件) 在其上运行. 这听起来是正确的, 并且似乎可以解释颇有几分. 毕竟, 一台计算机可以控制基于在其上运行的程序复杂精密设备. 但是有一个深刻的哲学原因,这个比喻是完全错误的, 但是,这将是另一篇文章.