From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tdatirv!sarima Thu Feb 20 15:22:20 EST 1992
Article 3889 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:3889 sci.physics:8025
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tdatirv!sarima
>From: sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Quantum theory and consciousness (was Pansychism)
Message-ID: <429@tdatirv.UUCP>
Date: 19 Feb 92 21:09:40 GMT
References: <jbaxter.697880577@adelphi> <1992Feb16.220955.18106@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Reply-To: sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Followup-To: comp.ai.philosophy
Organization: Teradata Corp., Irvine
Lines: 22

In article <1992Feb16.220955.18106@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> chalmers@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (David Chalmers) writes:
|I don't know that dualism has to be ugly.  A correct theory of qualia
|wil probably show how they are tightly enmeshed with other fundamental
|properties (you don't get much more fundamental than information
|processing).  But it's still dualism, as long as it's the case that the
|existence of qualia forces one to postulate extra facts about the
|universe, that one wouldn't be forced to postulate on the basis of
|physics alone (that's more or less a definition of dualism).

No it isn't, its the definition of emergence (at least to me).

Dualism is the concept that there exist entities or forces with no physical
realization.

Given your definition of dualism, life itself would be an example.
It, or at least the laws by which it operates, are *not* a necessary
derivative of physics.  The same is true of much of chemistry.

-- 
---------------
uunet!tdatirv!sarima				(Stanley Friesen)



