Lou, I'm glad you're thinking about the forum, but please make an effort and say how you thought the article was interesting and/or exactly why you dropped it here.
Lou, I'm glad you're thinking about the forum, but please make an effort and say how you thought the article was interesting and/or exactly why you dropped it here.
Sure Federica,
It was triggered by memories of the old forum where there was lots of discussion of physicalist-vs-idealist theories. A prediction was made that as idealism gained in current acceptance the physicalists would come up with new theories to explain how it was within the paradigm all along. 'Forth Law of Nature' was quite a leap for me. I thought others might be interested. Perhaps there might even be some discussion from which I might learn. My apologies if it seems out of place.
Lou, I'm glad you're thinking about the forum, but please make an effort and say how you thought the article was interesting and/or exactly why you dropped it here.
Sure Federica,
It was triggered by memories of the old forum where there was lots of discussion of physicalist-vs-idealist theories. A prediction was made that as idealism gained in current acceptance the physicalists would come up with new theories to explain how it was within the paradigm all along. 'Forth Law of Nature' was quite a leap for me. I thought others might be interested. Perhaps there might even be some discussion from which I might learn. My apologies if it seems out of place.
Not at all, Lou, it's surely not out of place, and thanks for sharing it! I was just saying that I think it's best to add at least a short word to accompany any link. Admittedly the topic is not my main focus right now and I only briefly browsed the article for now. I suppose it goes well with this interview of Penrose. From the first 15 minutes I watched it seemed relevant to me. I should watch it more slowly and carefully to be able to follow and gain some understanding. I guess some - maybe you are one of them - already know it.