https://informationvoyeur.wordpress.com/2013/02/24/what-is-it-like-to-be-a-bat-physicalist-assumptions-exposed/

https://informationvoyeur.wordpress.com/2013/02/24/what-is-it-like-to-be-a-bat-physicalist-assumptions-exposed/

On the other hand, maths does have a feeling of accessing something absolute – something utterly timeless. Clearly different people may feel that to different degrees, and may give it greater significance, but it is hard to deny.

I find it impossible to justify the evolution of advanced maths abilities on evolutionary grounds – if you disagree, at least suggest a plausible scenario!

” Why is it more reasonable (‘makes lmore sense’) to suppose that math reasoning evolved not for use by and among those who possess it but rather as a means to communicate with antother realm? Why does this hypothesis make more sense than the evolutionary explanation?”

At what point does it occur to you that your speculations here make many superfluous suppositions which physical evidence neither needs nor supports as elements of a convincing chain of reason?

You’ve apparently supposed that from certain supposed mysteries about consciousness–based on your erronous ideas about what is or isn’t true or possible or founded by reasonable evidence–that the way is open to magical thinking about physiological behavior.

Ex. “The fact that the brain/mind seems to have abilities (as I mentioned above) such as maths, that can’t possibly be explained by evolutionary pressure. I’d say this is a VERY strong reason to doubt that our minds are just a product of evolution – but if they evolved to communicate with another realm, this might make more sense.”

Why? Why is it more reasonable (‘makes lmore sense’) to suppose that math reasoning evolved for use by and among those who possess it rather than as a means to communicate with antother realm? Why does this hypothesis make more sense than the evolutionary explanation?

You claimed above that consciousness was to be understood as an irreducible feature of human beings. Now, you’re proposing that it is reducible to a quality which is reducible to remote transmission by another unidentified souce–though it would seem the source is non-human. Thus, you’ve done two things with what you called an irreducible quality of human life (i.e. consciousness) : you’ve removed its locus from human individuals themselves and sited it somewhere else.

So now, human consciousness is no longer something that humans have; it’s something that is lent by remote transmission from some mysterious source. Thus, it’s no longer ours by natural evolutionary processes,; it’s ours by virture of some remote transmitting source. Why is this a superior hypothesis?

As far as I’m concerned, you’ve just disqulified yourself from furhter consideration on my part in this forum.

You asked, ” How do you see this relating to Nagel’s book?”

Truth be told- I have not read Thomas Nagel’s book. I am, however very interested in Spiritualism and higher Consciousnesses. This is why I am following this thread with great interest, since lots of you folks are also interested in Spiritualism and higher Consciousnesses.

The current economic situation is not surprising to me. Simply because the Master told me this would happen. That too, way back in December 1985.

“Many years ago, I asked my Spiritual Master, “All the chaos in this world, who is responsible for it?” The Master replied,”2 classes of people who live by the principle of divide and rule. One is politicians and the other preachers.”
We need to find people who are neither politicians nor preachers to run this World.

I posted the following comment in April 2012.

‘A few years ago, when 2012 was trending, on the Agora’s 5 Minute Financial blog, somebody asked, “Will the world come to an end in 2012?” The blogger replied, “No, the world will not come to an end in 2012, but the world as we know it will cease to exist.”
I take this to mean that wars, religious bigotry, hatred, suffering etc will come to an end.
Short term there will be pain. Long term –There will be peace on earth and goodwill towards all mankind.

Currently, nobody is able to comprehend trends anywhere-be it economics, or share markets. The only trend being correctly predicted is that incumbent politicians in Europe will not be re elected.’

To solve the problems we are currently facing in the World, we need to find leaders who are neither politicians nor preachers.
I posted the following comment on a TED Conversations thread,
http://www.ted.com/conversations/1398/do_you_believe_that_our_future.html?c=541479

“Christians have been praying,
” Thy Will be done,
on Earth,
as it is in Heaven.”
When The Almighty establishes His Will on Earth, believe you me, all the wheeler dealers, lobbyists, pedophiles, what have you -they all will rue their actions.
Also, yes Spiritual Leadership is not about control. It is about leadership in action, through thought, word and deed.”
You will need to go to the thread to view the full conversation.

Also, if you went to November 2 on this thread, I posted my comment on astral traveling.
Ron Murphy commented that astral traveling could be due to drugs. I would distinguish between pseudo astral traveling, which is drug induced and the real thing.

I am aware that there is a school of thought that says, ‘if you cannot measure it, it does not exist.’
My definition of singularity – an equation which mathematicians cannot solve!

Consciousnesses is like feelings – it can neither be measured nor can it be described.

I take this opportunity to wish everybody – Happy Easter.

I don’t dispute your point that common sense dictates that purely physical components don’t generate qualia. (I once asked a physicalist neuroscientist, William Newsome of Stanford University, how consciousness arises from the brain. He said it is a complete mystery, though it is a dogma of neuroscience.) My point adds to that. I would follow philosopher of science Karl Popper who pointed out in The Self and Its Brain (co-authored by neuroscientist John C. Eccles) that logic is not a physical thing. Physical components don’t generate logic either. Logic consists of laws of thought, unlike the laws of science which govern the physical realm and which are subject to empirical testing. Popper basically argues that if you wish to be a consistent physicalist or materialist, you can’t acknowledge the truth of logic, since logic is not physical, so you must in a sense be irrational. You could also look at the “Prolegomena to Pure Logic,’ which is the introduction to Husserl’s massive tome, the Logical Investigations. Husserl asks, among other things, how the contingent processes of the brain could produce the necessary laws of logic, so we would know them as necessarily true.

Some people will argue that this isn’t quite a proof (somewhat analogous to my Ohm’s law example), and that it might be that some way would be found to bridge the gap (without suggesting one) – but common sense would assess Chalmers’ argument as being pretty strong – precisely because it is so general. This would pave the way to pour some serious scientific effort into exploring a physical/mental explanation of reality.

My point is that if science demands something akin to mathematical contradiction, it will never change direction. Common sense played a part in the past. For example, it wasn’t for many years that double slit experiments could be performed one photon at a time – ruling out some form of photon-photon interaction. QM didn’t have to wait for that – people saw the writing on the wall. I think Nagel and others can see the need for another scientific shift, but they are opposed by folk who want to resist this at all costs!