In his argument against physicalism (physical nature is all there is), Tim Andersen draws from the 19th-century philosopher Schopenhauer the concept of Will as the basis of all reality.
Tag: Bernardo Kastrup
Bernardo Kastrup: There is an “impassable explanatory gap between material quantities and experiential qualities.”
Kastrup: Even the output of measurement instruments is only accessible to us insofar as it is mentally perceived.
Philosophers: Must science be materialist? Vickers: Yes Kastrup: No
To claim that science must oppose non-materialist ideas is to make it into an ideology. We know little about some aspects of our universe.
Does a cosmopsychist believe in life after death?
Bernardo Kastrup: I certainly believe in consciousness after death. I believe that our core subjectivity, that implicit, innate sense of “I”-ness, remains undifferentiated. That’s the reason you still think you are the same person you were when you were five years old even though everything about you has changed.
A cosmopsychist talks about the universe, God, and free will
Bernardo Kastrup: Well, there certainly is something out there that is independent of all of us as individual minds, and which seems to hold the state of the world when nobody is looking at the world.
A Universal Mind is a reasonable idea, says Bernardo Kastrup
One reason that science media are respectful of cosmopsychism may be growing awareness of the problems with strict materialism, naturalism, or physicalism: As Michael Egnor has noted, “How can you have a proposition that the mind doesn’t exist? That means propositions don’t exist and that means that you don’t have a proposition.”
Michael Egnor and Bernardo Kastrup: Why consciousness couldn’t just evolve from the mud
Kastrup, a philosopher and computer scientist, does not accept a Darwinian account of the evolution of consciousness and is is also sympathetic to the basic intuitions behind the idea that there is design in nature (intelligent design theory).
Kastrup responds to Coyne: No, consciousness CANNOT be just a byproduct
Kastrup, as readers will see, hasn’t a whole lot of patience with Coyne. One can only wonder why. 😉
The deplorable word has been spoken: Consciousness cannot have evolved
Wow. This will be interesting to watch. Remember when AI pioneer David Gelernter bid Darwin goodbye? So far as we know, nothing bad happened to Gelernter. If nothing awful happens to Kastrup, we might have more reasonable discussions in the future of what consciousness even is.
Computer scientist asks: Why would philosophers deny that consciousness is real?
Because, says computer scientist and philosopher Bernardo Kastrup, the materialism they are committed to makes no sense and that’s the best they can do