A very good course on philosophy of mind and physics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bahman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bahman

Guest
You can find it [here](A very good course on philosophy of mind and physics.). Do you know any other on-line note?
 
Bahman said:
You can find it [here](A very good course on philosophy of mind and physics.). Do you know any other on-line note?
Click to expand...
Couldn’t bring up your link. However you might check this out: iapweb.org/

I don’t know if it gets into the philosophy of the mind but it definitely gets into physics. Dr. Anthony Rizzi is a Nobel Prize winner.

Linus2ndl
 
Linusthe2nd said:
Couldn’t bring up your link. However you might check this out: iapweb.org/

I don’t know if it gets into the philosophy of the mind but it definitely gets into physics. **Dr. Anthony Rizzi is a Nobel Prize winner.
**
Linus2ndl
Click to expand...
Really?
For what?
Do you have a link to prove it?
 
Linusthe2nd said:
I wouldn’t be interested in that one! I didn’t care for their conclusions, I know they are false.
Linus2nd
Click to expand...
We don’t have direct access to reality hence we are building models that they explain reality better and better. You cannot really drop this nice piece of writing without becoming aware of its content. It is simply an attempt to unify mind and physics which to my understating is brilliant effort.
 
By the way what does it mean that “Reality is not a thought. Rather, It is absence of separation.”?
 
Linusthe2nd said:
Sorry, I don’t uderstand what you are asking.
Click to expand...
I think he’s asking for evidence as you said Anthony Rizzi has won a Nobel Prize but his CV doesn’t say that (see catholic.com/profiles/anthony-rizzi).
Bahman said:
By the way what does it mean that “Reality is not a thought. Rather, It is absence of separation.”?
Click to expand...
I had a quick look but the whole course is terse like that. Is the PDF you linked just lecture notes? It doesn’t seem able to stand by itself.
 
Bahman said:
By the way what does it mean that “Reality is not a thought. Rather, It is absence of separation.”?
Click to expand...
Off hand I would say that what we know in our mind is what exists outside the mind in the world.

Linus2nd
 
P.S. Anthony Rizzi does not have a Nobel Prize, my error 😊.

Linus2nd.
 
inocente said:
I think he’s asking for evidence as you said Anthony Rizzi has won a Nobel Prize but his CV doesn’t say that (see catholic.com/profiles/anthony-rizzi).

I had a quick look but the whole course is terse like that. Is the PDF you linked just lecture notes? It doesn’t seem able to stand by itself.
Click to expand...
The link I gave is iapweb.org/.( I didn’t link a PDF ?. ) That is just an introductory statment to the site. You have to explore the site to find out more. The institute offers courses in physics while showing the value of philosophy for science. You have to sign up for these, but they will not take every one, you have to demonstrate an ability to handle the course content. Rizzi wrote one book, Science before Science which is readily available for sale or at local libraries in the U.S.

His philosophy is pretty good, but when he got into Quantum Mechanicx I couldn’t follow him anymore.

Linus2nd .
 
Bahman said:
We don’t have direct access to reality hence we are building models that they explain reality better and better. You cannot really drop this nice piece of writing without becoming aware of its content. It is simply an attempt to unify mind and physics which to my understating is brilliant effort.
Click to expand...
So it assumes indirect realism? There hasn’t been a single good argument for that, and there can not be even in principle. It relies upon Cartesian bifurcation, which is a problematic premise that Descartes introduced by assertion in his first meditation. We have no reason to grant that premise, and therefore no reason to grant the conclusion. I’ll give it a quick look, but I’d recommend;

amazon.com/Mind-Matter-Nature-Thomistic-Philosophy/dp/0813221412
amazon.com/Philosophy-Mind-Comprehensive-William-Jaworski/dp/1444333682/

The Metaphysics of Mind and Psychological Philosophy is one of my side interests. I’ve had to put it on the back burner for a little now, but these two books are two of the best I’ve read on the subject in recent years.

amazon.com/Modeling-Nature-Philosophy-Science-Synthesis/dp/0813208602/

This is also good for general Philosophy of Nature.
 
Linusthe2nd said:
The link I gave is iapweb.org/.( I didn’t link a PDF ?. )
Click to expand...
The comment about the pdf was to Bahman on his OP.

I had a look at one of Rizzi’s articles. He was trying to be sarcastic about Hawking but was so illogical that he made Hawking look good. To be a member of Rizzi’s gang he says you have to “have an understanding of key issues that have led our culture astray for 400 years and, what’s more, you know the solution”. That’s not good, that’s not good at all.

PS: maybe you should decamp to talk about him as it’s off-topic for the OP.
 
inocente said:
The comment about the pdf was to Bahman on his OP.

I had a look at one of Rizzi’s articles. He was trying to be sarcastic about Hawking but was so illogical that he made Hawking look good. To be a member of Rizzi’s gang he says you have to “have an understanding of key issues that have led our culture astray for 400 years and, what’s more, you know the solution”. That’s not good, that’s not good at all.

PS: maybe you should decamp to talk about him as it’s off-topic for the OP.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t my purpose to talk about Rizzi at all, I was responting to the O.P.'s question :D.

You seem to be in a especially critical mood today :eek:.

Linus2nd
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top