Interesting Ian wrote:
There's an explanation of how a car engine works. You look at the component parts and how they fit and function together.
An explanation of why we see redness cannot be so reduced. All we have are physical processes. Presumably a particular process in the brain is the particular correlate of the actual experience of redness. But you cannot derive this experience. All you can derive are other physical processes. This is all that's required for a car engine, or indeed anything else pertaining to the world; apart from conscious experiences.
What on earth do you think the mind/body problem is??
You should realise by now that I don't just say these things.
You do. The explanation of how color vision works has been provided. You just seem to be unable to understand it.
That's all right, you have something in common with a minority of college freshmen, a metaphorical form of Daltonism when it comes to color vision.
(1) Telepathy would occur when one person could receive another person's thoughts, without speech or electronics. On present evidence is telepathy (a) impossible, (b.) unlikely, (c) possible, or (d) actual?
D
(2) Suppose that there were firm evidence of telepathy. Would this mean that physics ought to be (a) abandoned, (b) supplemented with a very different discipline, (c) expanded, (d) left as it is?
B
(3) Suppose there were statistical evidence that the positions of the planets influence human fate. Would this be because of (a) an accident, (b) unknown causal processes, (c) something beyond our understanding, or (d) the truth of astrology?
C
(4) That human beings can survive death is (a) likely, (b) possible, (c) unlikely, (d) impossible.
B
(5) That today's physics may someday be seen as wildly inaccurate myth is (a) impossible, (b) unlikely, (c) possible, (d) probable.
C
(6) Where are rainbows: (a) in the sky, (b) in people's minds, (c) in raindrops, (d) nowhere?
B
(7) Numbers are (a) fictions, (b) marks on paper, (c) ideas in our minds, (d) objects independent of us.
C
(8) Compare democracy (in politics) and energy (in science): (a) energy and democracy are both just concepts we use to describe our experiences; (b) both energy and democracy are dubious concepts; (c) energy is a useful concept and democracy a dubious one; (d) energy is real and democracy is just an idea.
A
(9) A factor in many diseases is 'stress', which in part depends on a person's experiences and emotions. The suggestion that stress might one day be understood in purely physical terms is (a) likely, (b) possible, (c) improbable, (d) impossible.
D
(10) Brain chemistry seems to be connected with some severe mental disorders. The possibility that a person's personality might be completely explicable in terms of their brain chemistry is (a) crazy, (b) far-fetched, (c) likely, (d) probable.
B
(11) People who believe that they are biological organisms governed by biological principles are likely to treat other people in a way that is (a) more understanding than, (b) different from, (c) the same as, (d) less understanding than those who believe that humans are exceptions to the principles governing other animals behaviour.
Noob? I think the person you are responding to is long gone. Check out some more recent threads or start your own if there's a topic you want to discuss.
