p4wnc6 comments on What is Evidence? - Less Wrong

60 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 22 September 2007 06:43AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (44)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: p4wnc6 19 August 2011 12:54:14PM *  2 points [-]

Communication is a physical process. Unless you can put forward a coherent, testable model for non-physical communication, then talking about communication from a non-physical entity to a physical entity has no semantic meaning. If no experiment can be performed to distinguish two hypotheses (e.g. that there is or is not such a thing as an epiphenomenon) then that thing is irrelevant given that human minds are purely physical objects and human thought, as far as all evidence is concerned, obeys our best models of computation (Church-Turing thesis, etc.).

Epiphenomenal hypotheses are still required to pass Occam's razor. If there is a simpler explanation (e.g. purely physical) that accounts for the evidence, then intellectual integrity demands you take that view. Positing epiphenomena is no different than positing unicorns, unless you have quantifiable evidence for the phenomena and hence they would not be epiphenomenal.