| https://www.huffingtonpost.com/kingsley-dennis-phd/quantum-consciousness-2-e_b_687282.html Have a good read of this, if you will. What are your thoughts? |
JustaCratJan 4, 2018 12:40 PM
| we're not quite there yet for the Looking Glass |
| キターーーー(・∀・)ーーー！！ |
| It was a good read indeed and brings up interesting theories. Just goes to show why Overlord is regarded as one of the best anime of 2018. |
| I ship @Cewkie and @DarkZeroCalibur  |
| Adding the keyword 'Quantum' into anything absurd does not make it sound less absurd, similar to it's effect on Quantum Mechanics. After reading the article, I'd say I have no opinion whatsoever. But it was decent enough for me not to quit halfway through. |
| Disclaimer: This has nothing to do with quantum mechanics or physics and science in general. It's a dude with a history of writing new age mystic woo shit writing about quantum woo. |
| Holy shit this was extremely boring. Why can't you guys who write these articles just smoke a joint and take a nap? It's healthy for good minds to rest well. |
wariowariowario said: Or watch Overlord. They say those that do ascends the normal human capacity and becomes a step closer to their perfect true self. Holy shit this was extremely boring. Why can't you guys who write these articles just smoke a joint and take a nap? It's healthy for good minds to rest well. |
| I ship @Cewkie and @DarkZeroCalibur |
SkyHora said: wariowariowario said: Or watch Overlord. They say those that do ascends the normal human capacity and becomes a step closer to their perfect true self. Holy shit this was extremely boring. Why can't you guys who write these articles just smoke a joint and take a nap? It's healthy for good minds to rest well. I have already perfected myself. I have seen everything. I know everything. I even know how Overlord'll end. I am the fucking Buddha. |
| You could thank Ainz-sama for that. |
| I ship @Cewkie and @DarkZeroCalibur |
| He's not saying anything new, really... even the original pioneers of Quantum Theory were well aware of the implications it had for human consciousness. I mean, the observer is critical to the theory itself. The article talks more about neurons and less about quantum mechanics, which might be seen as a weakness. That being said, it's good to read about stuff like this - he's not wrong that our brains are connected with the exterior universe on an intrinsic level. Anyone who's had a true psychedelic or spiritual experience can confirm this. |
| I CELEBRATE myself, And what I assume you shall assume, For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. |
| I don't think the general population of MAL is smart enough for or even cares about these kind of "deep" topics... We just want to shitpost and threaten eachother dammit |
| ~ Nas, The "OG Bulgarian"~ Formerly known as: ~ Gokuvich, The "OG Bulgarian"~  |
| Interesting, especially the "mirror neuron" stuff. I once read about an experiment where a group of people were divided in 2 groups, one which observed some people doing some stuff while the other didn't. The "stuff" that other people were doing were things that require skills, such as sports. After some hours the 2 groups of people tried to do the same activities that were proposed and the results were that the people that observed the activities were better at them. |
| It's a bunch of new age pseudo-science bullshit written by a sociologist Ph.D. who fancies bad puns, like drawing the analogy between long distance relationships and quantum "entanglement". They're desperate to try to reinsert the narrative of religion into science and reestablish a mind-body dualism. Quantum theory disproved the possibility of non-local actors, which is why they're now trying to establish the same thing in terms of quantum terminology. And as long as they use enough sci-fi sounding terms like energy, field, black hole, waves, entanglement, etc., it will trigger enough people's imaginations to believe it's real when it's actually nonsense. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
Gan_water said: lmao. That's like saying anyone who's schizophrenic can confirm Jesus.That being said, it's good to read about stuff like this - he's not wrong that our brains are connected with the exterior universe on an intrinsic level. Anyone who's had a true psychedelic or spiritual experience can confirm this. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
katsucats said: Gan_water said: lmao. That's like saying anyone who's schizophrenic can confirm Jesus.That being said, it's good to read about stuff like this - he's not wrong that our brains are connected with the exterior universe on an intrinsic level. Anyone who's had a true psychedelic or spiritual experience can confirm this. Not really man. Schizos hear all types of voices, not just the good lord's. |
| I CELEBRATE myself, And what I assume you shall assume, For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. |
katsucats said: It's a bunch of new age pseudo-science bullshit written by a sociologist Ph.D. who fancies bad puns, like drawing the analogy between long distance relationships and quantum "entanglement". They're desperate to try to reinsert the narrative of religion into science and reestablish a mind-body dualism. Quantum theory disproved the possibility of non-local actors, which is why they're now trying to establish the same thing in terms of quantum terminology. And as long as they use enough sci-fi sounding terms like energy, field, black hole, waves, entanglement, etc., it will trigger enough people's imaginations to believe it's real when it's actually nonsense. If you want to dismiss all of that article as bullshit, then you're dismissing future scientific advances on aspects of reality our current scientific understanding cannot adequately explain. That article contains a number of noteworthy observations, and it paves the way for deeper research. To be clear, this was a sociological analysis with reference to scientific data. Also, mind-body dualism was not necessitated. |
MarthePryde said: The main article (the first one posted) contained no relevance to scientific articles. He cited one "expert", a new age religious mystic. He cited other research, but instead of utilizing their results in the normal way, be drew a childish linguistic analogy (i.e. pun), using the same word to describe something else. Just because science uses the word "energy" doesn't mean you can say shit about, for example, "dark energy", or "his face was energetic", or "goku had over 9000 points of energy" in the same way.katsucats said: If you want to dismiss all of that article as bullshit, then you're dismissing future scientific advances on aspects of reality our current scientific understanding cannot adequately explain. That article contains a number of noteworthy observations, and it paves the way for deeper research. To be clear, this was a sociological analysis with reference to scientific data. Also, mind-body dualism was not necessitated. It's a bunch of new age pseudo-science bullshit written by a sociologist Ph.D. who fancies bad puns, like drawing the analogy between long distance relationships and quantum "entanglement". They're desperate to try to reinsert the narrative of religion into science and reestablish a mind-body dualism. Quantum theory disproved the possibility of non-local actors, which is why they're now trying to establish the same thing in terms of quantum terminology. And as long as they use enough sci-fi sounding terms like energy, field, black hole, waves, entanglement, etc., it will trigger enough people's imaginations to believe it's real when it's actually nonsense. The second article posted tried to fit mind-body dualism in scientific terms by suggesting, without evidence, that there is a black hole like structure around the brain. If you want to learn about quantum physics or neuroscience, read actual peer reviewed journals or textbooks instead of op eds written by a religiously inclined sociologist with wishful thinking. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| Holy shit, my attention spam is so goddamn short. I read the whole thing, but took a while. Cool stuff. Still, Huffington post is trash. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
katsucats said: MarthePryde said: The main article (the first one posted) contained no relevance to scientific articles. He cited one "expert", a new age religious mystic. He cited other research, but instead of utilizing their results in the normal way, be drew a childish linguistic analogy (i.e. pun), using the same word to describe something else. Just because science uses the word "energy" doesn't mean you can say shit about, for example, "dark energy", or "his face was energetic", or "goku had over 9000 points of energy" in the same way.If you want to dismiss all of that article as bullshit, then you're dismissing future scientific advances on aspects of reality our current scientific understanding cannot adequately explain. That article contains a number of noteworthy observations, and it paves the way for deeper research. To be clear, this was a sociological analysis with reference to scientific data. Also, mind-body dualism was not necessitated. The second article posted tried to fit mind-body dualism in scientific terms by suggesting, without evidence, that there is a black hole like structure around the brain. If you want to learn about quantum physics or neuroscience, read actual peer reviewed journals or textbooks instead of op eds written by a religiously inclined sociologist with wishful thinking. With reference to scientific advances* If you will accept my correction. That aside, you are still dismissing this article on shallow grounds. The article was speculative, for sure, but that does not discredit its viability. Anyone well aware of how empathy functions in society can testify to the sense alluded to in this article. Like I said, the unequivocal reality is that we do not adequately understand the aspects of reality mentioned in this article with our current science. Therefore your blatant rejection of all that it alluded to says more about your own intellectual attitude than it does about its credibility. Empathy could have quantum aspects, otherwise, I would think that the outer scope of social behaviourism to which it is perceived lies in sub-conscious perceptions that would require the acutest of science to study. It's certainly not something we're going to advance much further today. I would suggest having a good re-read of that article. I would also suggest putting your atheism aside whilst doing so, as it would seem to be disruptive to any impartial intellectual pursuit. |
JustaCratJan 5, 2018 4:56 AM
More topics from this board
Poll: » Do you live with regrets?Lightskynight - 4 hours ago |
7 |
by LoveYourEyes
»»
12 seconds ago |
|
» Are you e-famous? Are you an Internet celebrity?DesuMaiden - 6 hours ago |
14 |
by JKKH
»»
7 minutes ago |
|
» how dark is your personality? ( 1 2 )GrimAtrament - Mar 27, 2018 |
75 |
by Amityblight
»»
49 minutes ago |
|
» Do you post your own original artwork onto social media?DesuMaiden - Apr 10 |
22 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
1 hour ago |
|
Poll: » Would you like to be a sugar baby?Ejrodiew - Apr 10 |
18 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
2 hours ago |