You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

TheAncientGeek comments on How do you notice when you are ignorant of necessary alternative hypotheses? - Less Wrong Discussion

16 [deleted] 24 June 2014 06:12PM

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

Comments (69)

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

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 28 June 2014 12:32:45PM 0 points [-]

The comment has about emergentism, but your reply was about soul theory, which is quite different.

Strong emergentism is notoriously badly defined, but a typical version might include:

1 mental phenomena are irreducible, or have an irreducible component

2 mental phenomena are not predictable from neural activity by standard physical laws

3 mental phenomena phenomena are related to neural activity by special psychophysical laws

Note that 3 guarantees a close relationship between neural activity and consciousness.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 28 June 2014 07:15:35PM *  1 point [-]

Strong emergentism is notoriously badly defined, but a typical version might include:

...

3 mental phenomena phenomena are related to neural activity by special psychophysical laws

Is anyone claiming to have found any yet?

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 28 June 2014 08:03:36PM 0 points [-]

No, but that's another issue, again.