First off, let me say that I am genuinely impressed with the progress you seem to be making. Not a perfect argument, but you are moving forward in strides. Good job!
Now we have something somewhat readable that looks somewhat like an argument, we can discuss the various points you are putting forward. It's a long argument, so you'll have to forgive me for not dealing with all of it in one go.
Why do you assert that anything that is objectively true must be a function of the universe?
Can consciousness not be an emergent property?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
Now we have something somewhat readable that looks somewhat like an argument, we can discuss the various points you are putting forward. It's a long argument, so you'll have to forgive me for not dealing with all of it in one go.
(December 20, 2011 at 11:40 am)amkerman Wrote: In human experience and scientific achievement, things that are accepted as objectively true outside the realm of human consciousness and observation humanity has termed "forces of nature", "univeral laws", or "functions of the universe" (possibly baseless claim, still trying to refine this mess)
- laws of physics are believed to exist outside of consciousness
- motion
- thermodynamics
- etc
If consciousness is believed to be objectlvely real, it would correctly be termed a function of the universe
Why do you assert that anything that is objectively true must be a function of the universe?
Can consciousness not be an emergent property?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
