On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 9/7/2010 1:48 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote: >> .... > > Having said this your point does not follow, in the sense that even if > consciousness supervenes on interactions of particles (non mechanism) this > would not prevents consciousness to retroact on the particles, like when a > painter moves ink and papers to express his artistic feelings. Another > example: we may argue that guns and atomic bombs are produced in part by > human fears.
But then what causes human fears? You could say quarks and electrons cause human fears which then cause guns and bombs. OR, you could say quarks and electrons cause human fears *and also cause* guns and bombs. Human fears being epiphenomenal and non-causal. How could you tell which option was correct? Human flesh and guns and bombs all boil down to specific arrangements of quarks and electrons. There's no mystery as to how one could lead to the others. The mystery is why there should be an experience of fear associated certain arrangements of quarks and electrons and experiences of happiness associated with other arrangements and (presumably) no experience at all associated with yet other arrangements. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
