Over the past two months, I have had the great pleasure to lead a workshop exploring the powerful mind, works, discoveries and political effects of the great Russian biogeochemist Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky (1863-1945).
In a perverse way, isn't the un-addressability of the position of "mind" in nature a KEY signature of the unimpeachable primacy of "mind". I.e. "mind" is the bottom most ultimate underlying element of all reality. And from within the "mind" to address a full understanding of "the mind" itself is mathematically impossible as Turing argued in his "stopping problem" paper (entscheidungsproblem). Also, Godel said and indeed PROVED a similar thought, mathematically: from within ANY system of postulates and theorems (any scientific system) it is impossible for that system to discover all truths...there will ALWAYS be truths OUTSIDE the provability of ANY such system.
I was watching the Hoover Institution video of mathematical arguments against Charles Darwin, and how, in reality today, Darwin is very arguably "OBSOLETE", but there's this ideological muscle memory to support Darwin which is not at all merited. https://youtu.be/noj4phMT9OE
I agree by logic human and human faculties are natural, and all human actions need to follow natural laws, nothing can exist in the universe which is not natural. The question would be if human actions, including technology, comply with life on earth. River lead pollution, for example, does not comply with life on earth, or at least not present existing life. Lets put it in other words, does present human technological activity nurtures the environment so as to promote more diverse life? or does it degrades life, and by degrading it also deteriorates human life?
And if you'd ever like a proofreader, just for those funky little spots ALL writers sometimes miss, I'd be pleased to be there in that capacity. First one is free. ^_^
In a perverse way, isn't the un-addressability of the position of "mind" in nature a KEY signature of the unimpeachable primacy of "mind". I.e. "mind" is the bottom most ultimate underlying element of all reality. And from within the "mind" to address a full understanding of "the mind" itself is mathematically impossible as Turing argued in his "stopping problem" paper (entscheidungsproblem). Also, Godel said and indeed PROVED a similar thought, mathematically: from within ANY system of postulates and theorems (any scientific system) it is impossible for that system to discover all truths...there will ALWAYS be truths OUTSIDE the provability of ANY such system.
I was watching the Hoover Institution video of mathematical arguments against Charles Darwin, and how, in reality today, Darwin is very arguably "OBSOLETE", but there's this ideological muscle memory to support Darwin which is not at all merited. https://youtu.be/noj4phMT9OE
what if the biosphere and noosphere have been infiltrated by predatory mimics whose agenda is the total take over of the planet
I agree by logic human and human faculties are natural, and all human actions need to follow natural laws, nothing can exist in the universe which is not natural. The question would be if human actions, including technology, comply with life on earth. River lead pollution, for example, does not comply with life on earth, or at least not present existing life. Lets put it in other words, does present human technological activity nurtures the environment so as to promote more diverse life? or does it degrades life, and by degrading it also deteriorates human life?
Thanks, Matt. I wonder, do you ever SLEEP? ;)
And if you'd ever like a proofreader, just for those funky little spots ALL writers sometimes miss, I'd be pleased to be there in that capacity. First one is free. ^_^
I am totally dismayed to put it lightly. The deciet we live through will end soon God willing!