Sabitlenmiş Tweet
@ProfFeynman "The truth", even in science, is an unstable compound of facts, concepts and beliefs.
English
Phantom Philosophy
5.1K posts
Phantom Philosophy
@philosophyeye
Examining the relationship between ideas and facts. Communicating constructive criticism. "We see as we believe, believing we see as we see."
Katılım Ocak 2020
276 Takip Edilen290 Takipçiler
Change is an open mystery. Just look at the interim results. Selective change is even more mysterious. Calling it “natural selection” doesn’t explain cause & effect - as if “nat explanations” need to be taken for what they are - belonging to an omnipotent nature just being itself
Phantom Philosophy@philosophyeye
EVOLUTION: An explanation of change in nature by way of natural selection—being the process of evolution—the nature of nature nominated as the logically singular and self-sufficient cause of the possibilities that make the evolution possible… problem solved? #NewDevilsDictionary
English
Questions of consciousness are fraught with the tacit expectation of gaining an explanation, as if it’s the only way to know what we’re talking about.
Nigel Warburton 🇺🇦 #FreeUkraine@philosophybites
Are plants conscious? @TheNewWorldmag thenewworld.co.uk/nigel-warburto…
English
Two inconclusive observations: the universe is capable of supporting a form of intelligent life and can also exist without it —which point to a third mystery: our inconclusive representation of a component dimension which the physical component alone is incapable of representing.
Physics & Astronomy Zone@zone_astronomy
Why don't aliens visit our Solar System?
English
A ‘THEORY OF EVERYTHING’: Essentially a theory about a theory, with a fatal flaw, which begs the question of ‘what is’ in order for ‘what it is’ to be explained by what is to follow—with an outcome yet to be—to be anticipated by a theory yet to be propounded.
#NewDevilsDictionary
Institute of Art and Ideas@IAI_TV
Science tells us what things are made of, not what they are. | iai.tv/articles/on-th… For Graham Harman, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, the world’s ultimate nature can’t be captured by equations or unified theories.
English
@nosnow365 Maybe not just ‘natura naturans’ but also ‘natura naturata’, which we observe crudely as ‘cause and effect’.
English
There’s nothing more bizarre than thinking about ourselves as part of nature - an “objective truth” just waiting to be unpacked - which gives us reason to think it’s really nature endeavouring to think about itself.
Prof. Lee Cronin@leecronin
The physics & chemistry that gives rise ‘life’ is more bizarre than anyone has imagined.
English
Intelligent beings in nature, explaining themselves as “from nature” - like “nature being itself” - is no explanation of what they see as “emergence” and “evolution”, or “nature “, or themselves for that matter.
That Old Crone@nosnow365
We may not be who you think we are.
English
@PhilosophyOfPhy In recognising that “morality is entirely our invention…a human creation” we are paying regard to something that the universe cannot show us - of telling importance - that there’s more to reality than that created by the ‘thingness of the universe’ in its version of what can be.
English
“The universe does not tell us what is right or wrong. Morality is entirely our invention.”
This reflects the thinking of some physicists who saw the cosmos as indifferent to human concerns. The universe has no built-in rules for ethics or behavior, it simply exists.
What we call “right” or “wrong” comes entirely from human society, culture, and imagination.
The deeper lesson is that morality is a human creation.
We construct it to guide ourselves, not because the cosmos demands it.
This perspective challenges the idea of absolute moral laws, reminding us that ethics is ours to shape, and that the universe remains neutral to our judgments.
English
Consciousness in nature doesn’t make it “nature’s consciousness” or prove that we will be able to find out what it “really is” once we discover “it’s origin in natural causes”.
Big Brain Philosophy@BigBrainPhiloso
Descartes' core dilemma: "My mind is the only thing I can be certain of. But how do I prove anything outside it exists?"
English
“Objective reality” plays on the imagination of what “reality is like” without having to imagine it - a paradoxical understanding contrived of a self-cancelling perception - which the “objective facts”, so perceived, cannot substantiate.
Philosophy Of Physics@PhilosophyOfPhy
"Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real." – Niels Bohr
English
The universe isn’t responsible for our actions - the realisation of a higher interconnectedness.
Philosophy Of Physics@PhilosophyOfPhy
“The illusion of separateness between people and the universe is the root of conflict.” David Bohm believed much of human strife comes from failing to recognize the deep interconnectedness of all things. He argued that wars, divisions, and misunderstandings aren’t just social problems, they reflect a misunderstanding of reality itself. His words challenge us to see beyond superficial differences and recognize the unity underlying the universe.
English
The atomic reality that’s necessary for life shows no sign of being concerned about us and our concerns. As such, a profound question arises concerning the role of novel realities that the underlying ‘natural possibilities’ can’t begin to recognise or explain for us on their own.
World and Science@WorldAndScience
Think about the following: A physicist studying atoms, is really just atoms trying to understand themselves...
English
@WorldAndScience That being so, there would be nothing else to think about.
However, I think about thinking - therefore I am!
English
Think about the following: A physicist studying atoms, is really just atoms trying to understand themselves...
English
NB: Either effects are merely derivatives of causes, in the sense that there’s no real difference to explain, or they make a real difference (yet to be explained) - to become the true locus of change - with every known cause being the effect of an unfathomable engine of creation.
Phantom Philosophy@philosophyeye
We can accept that causes explain effects without understanding their power to do so, except as effects of other causes, but we can’t afford to ignore an obvious fact of causality - in order to make the inexplicable seem explicable - that there’s more to an effect than its cause.
English
Delineating the universe in terms of ‘what is’ neither explains its origin in something else or itself, nor does it show us ‘what’s to come’. Nor can we say that ‘what’s now’ (yet to be confirmed) must hold all the answers—as if we already know what an explanation must amount to.
Phantom Philosophy@philosophyeye
For there to be change, a cause is needed; for there to be a cause, change is needed. Something makes the crucial difference, which isn’t so easy to explain, especially when causes are seen to acquire intentions - an epic diff which can’t be normalised as caused by other causes.
English
We can accept that causes explain effects without understanding their power to do so, except as effects of other causes, but we can’t afford to ignore an obvious fact of causality - in order to make the inexplicable seem explicable - that there’s more to an effect than its cause.
Phantom Philosophy@philosophyeye
“Explanation” unmasked: “Emergence” doesn’t explain change Chance can’t create possibility Facts don’t “speak for themselves” “Natural causes” don’t expln effects “Original causes” don’t expln origins “First come” isn’t “most real” Logic doesn’t settle truth Maths can’t make X=Y
English
@leecronin As the ancients had deduced, so we might rediscover, that without a capacity for recognition, a discovery would be no better at announcing its importance than the stone that makes its presence felt by falling on your head.
English
Discovery is unpredictable because novel ‘discoveries’ cannot be found from prior data in principle. The interface of the discrete past with the continuous future produces discovery. If you find a ‘discovery’ deducible from your data then by definition it isn’t a discovery.
English
There’s more to ‘the nature of things’ than explanation can configure as ‘the nature of nature’, esp when ‘things in nature’ gain intentions and purposes quite untypical of ‘natural causes’ - as with ‘emergent’ sentient life - an order of change with ‘supra-natural’ implications.
Phantom Philosophy@philosophyeye
@zone_astronomy The idea that consciousness may be connecting the human mind to the fundamental fabric of the universe comes first from a state of mind which, in being different, can see there’s a fundamental difference - a plurality - unexplained by the fact that there’s a necessary connection.
English
Science works with the assumption that “what is” makes the rules for “what can be”. Unfortunately, the fact that science works in a world that works isn’t sufficient to validate this theoretical assumption.
Phantom Philosophy@philosophyeye
@IAI_TV @jimalkhalili If one fact could simply account for another, to be understood by its identity as a cause, with all the evidence pointing in one direction, then we wouldn’t need to quibble over this or that explanation. Alas, “evidence based” & “evidence driven” doesn’t make a fact of a theory.
English