Intelligent Design Naturalism Philosophy Physics

Ed Feser on theoretical physicist’s new book: “the particle collection that fancied itself a physicist”

Spread the love

He explains why reductionism is ridiculous:

In an essay-length blog post, philosopher Edward Feser (pictured) addresses Chapter 5 of theoretical physicist Brian Greene‘s new book, Until the End of Time: Mind, Matter, and Our Search for Meaning in an Evolving Universe (2020). Greene attempts to show that the mind can reasonably be understood as a collection of particles governed by mathematical laws and Feser says, no, it can’t.

“Greene’s fallacy is like that of someone who says that, since a map is enormously useful for getting around a certain bit of terrain, predicting what you’ll see when you reach this or that part of it, etc., it follows that there is nothing more to the terrain that what is captured by the map. As Alfred Korzybski once said, “the map is not the territory.” If only more physicists were capable of seeing what a crackpot linguist could! – Edward Feser, “The Particle Collection That Fancied Itself a Physicist” at Edward Feser Blog (August 20, 2020)”

News, “Why the brain can’t be understood simply in terms of particles” at Mind Matters News

You may also enjoy: Michael Egnor’s dialogues with Ed Feser and some of Feser’s other comments on questions of the day:

Remarkably, a simple triangle can disprove materialism Philosopher of mind Edward Feser and neurosurgeon Michael Egnor chat about the essential immateriality of our minds.

Knowledge is power, sort of… If that’s all knowledge is, the resulting science is bound to be limited, says Michael Egnor. He is reflecting on philosopher Edward Feser’s recent, rather sharp review of cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker’s Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress

and

If computers are intelligent, climbing a tree is flying. That, says Edward Feser, is the take-home message from Gary Smith’s book, The AI Delusion

Hat tip: Ken Francis, co-author with Theodore Dalrymple of The Terror of Existence: From Ecclesiastes to Theatre of the Absurd

3 Replies to “Ed Feser on theoretical physicist’s new book: “the particle collection that fancied itself a physicist”

  1. 1
    jawa says:

    Very attractive topic.

    It seems that our natural human gullibility is what makes us fascinated by books like the one referenced in this post. Our poor discerning abilities seem associated with our apathy toward the contextual meaning of words.
    It suffices to look at the nonsensical manner in which the word “unexpected” is used in serious scientific papers, as shown in a recent post (https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/unexpected-complexity-found-in-human-heart-a-use-for-the-myocardial-trabeculae/#comment-710349) in this website. Those absurdities go undetected when we read them. Simply because we’re numbed like zombies. It’s a pathetic reality nobody should deny, but we aren’t capable of recognizing and admitting, much less correcting. I believe that it takes a divine intervention to pull us out of that lifelessness.

  2. 2
    Truthfreedom says:

    ___

    “All the same, he (Greene) fails to see the depth of the problem, and in particular fails to see that the methods of physics are precisely what generate the problem in the first place, that it is clueless to think (as Greene does) that the problem can be resolved by further application of those methods. Moreover, some of the writers Greene cites make this point themselves”.

    https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2020/08/the-particle-collection-that-fancied.html?m=1#more

    Bad meta-physics does NOT help physics.
    Materialism is a hindrance to human progress.

  3. 3
    Heartlander says:

    Scientism: America’s State Religionby Edward Feser, August 25, 2020

Leave a Reply