(January 29, 2015 at 3:04 am)FallentoReason Wrote:The problem is that there is a noticible difference between the shared environment and the individual environments. How can such a feature arise if there is no explicit container that holds our individual consciousness from the shared environment? If you say the container is the brain and the shared environment is our universe, then you have to explain how a non-material entity (consciousness) is enclosed in a material-like entity (the brain). As I see it, you have not solved anything. You have asserted consciousness is a fundemental entity and lost the explanation of material-like objects.(January 29, 2015 at 2:30 am)Surgenator Wrote: I guess I'll be the first to say that this sound like bullshit. One reason is the requirement that our independent consciouness have to all share the same environment when we are awake, but not when we are asleep or reading a story.
But so what? Who says the only thing you're "allowed" to experience is the one reality? What's the problem in wandering off into our own thoughts?
Quote:Quote:Please elaborate, because I can see the same problem with physics, unless you mean something that I haven't grasped properly.
Another reason is that mathematics provides multiple non-physical solutions.
Lets take a very simple example, I throw a ball up in the air and I want to know when will it land on the ground. The equation is a 2nd order polynomial that has two solutions, one will be negative and one positive. Mathematically, both are equally valid, but physically the positive one is only valid. So my point is that mathematics can give you multiple answers where only a few are valid in reality. Mathematics is necessary to model the universe, but you need to add extra conditions that are NOT mathematically motivated to make the model comport to reality.