Asperger's/Autism; a spiritual condition?
Well, that is an assertion. I would counter-argue that a material theory of the brain does not deny mental states, and their 1st-person experience, thus I do not see a reason why your reference to Kant matters too much.
Well, the issue is that the physical background is not the basis of the knowledge. The knowledge is based upon something non-physical. If something can be without the physical background, then there must be a non-physical element.
When you say "I am angry" you refer to a non-physical state of your mind, not of your brain, because you do not necessarily know about the link between the physical brain and your mind.
Well, no, you actually are completely misunderstanding me. "This is wet" is referent to a feeling provided about water. This feeling is non-material, as it is qualia. Saying "this is wet" is actually a statement about a mind experience provided by the material, not a statement about the material, beyond that this material conjures up experiences of wetness.
Brains obey logic, but the position that brains understand logic is not supported by your argument.
Rocks exist in a universe that we live in. This universe is governed by laws. Those laws contain logic. Our rocks do not take a stand outside the universe to observe it. Our rocks must obey the laws of the universe.
Have we then successfully argued for the sentience of rocks? No. Rocks cannot understand logic. Why then would human brains have to understand logic? They don't, the connection does not necessarily exist.
The additional relationship in reality that mystics see is something that people enjoy and find profound.
Well, the problems are subjective. I mean, you could be fine with AIDS, you could not care about higher standards of living, even wanting them to be lower for some groups. It is not as if these questions demand to be considered important, as such a notion is meaningless.
Accepting the world as it is does not necessarily help, but rather can be incredibly depressing, and does not necessarily confer the same positive benefits that an irrational belief could provide. Not only that, but there is a question about the proper way to understand the world as it is, as subjectivity and emotionality are integral parts of being in the world, things that it would almost be impossible to actually address the world without.
Those two statements are essentially identical. They're both saying the same thing.
_________________
LadybugS's boyfriend
Those two statements are essentially identical. They're both saying the same thing.
True, but Magnus was perhaps misinterpreting the significance of nondeterminacy in quantum mechanics (although talking about eigenvalues and Hermitian operators may not be the best way to clarify things). The point is that quantum mechanics *does* make a very definite prediction over a large number of experiments, making it perfectly fine in the scientific paradigm.
_________________
* here for the nachos.
ruveyn will do stuff like that. I was once tempted to correct him in saying that I did not need to be corrected, but I did not think it worth it.
ruveyn is an Aspie and is genetically programmed to do stuff like that.
ruveyn
What I was referring to is how a particle can appear in two places which is dependent upon the observer. When we are looking, it behaves like a particle. When we are not looking, it behaves as a wave.
_________________
As long as man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings he will never know health or peace. For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other.
-Pythagoras
I'm taking a graduate course on quantum mechanics this semester and am having so much fun learning all about these Hermitian matricies! (Half sarcasm there.) One thing that I finally got clarified for myself was the truth behind the whole observer deal. It has absolutely nothing to do with our minds. In the two slit experiment, "observation" of which slit the particle enters has nothing to do with our eyes. In experiments, physicists use a light source and shine it perpendicular to the path of the electrons right behind the slits. A detector then watches for a small burst of light as the electron hits the photon. So all this observation is, is simply collision of light quanta with electrons. Nothing mystical or supernatural about that. It's solid, hard, objective reality.
_________________
LadybugS's boyfriend
"Wave" or "particle" are models to describe behaviour of "thing in itself" ("Ding ansich"). There is no reason to assume that both behaviours must exclude each other, but can be similar ways of description.
To understand nature on deeper physical level you emancipate yourself from the ideas you have from all-day experience and need to accept that the world is only to understand on very abstract and mathematical level.
There is a bit of confusion on what quanta really are.
from Introduction to the Quantum Theory, emphasis added
_________________
* here for the nachos.
"Wave" or "particle" are models to describe behaviour of "thing in itself" ("Ding ansich"). There is no reason to assume that both behaviours must exclude each other, but can be similar ways of description.
To understand nature on deeper physical level you emancipate yourself from the ideas you have from all-day experience and need to accept that the world is only to understand on very abstract and mathematical level.
Your point is well taken. Our intuition is formed by the experiences we have in a human-scaled world. This intuition is ill suited from dealing with the very, very small, the very, very large and the very, very fast and the very, very slow. That is why we need mathematical tools for dealing with the quantum reality. Our life-times are way too short to deal with the reality of evolution. The best we can do is construct a verisimilitude of the process by studying bio-chemical processes and fossils. As Kant pointed out, our consciousness is on the wrong side of the sensory barrier. We only get to see our side of the spectacles. All we have, in the end, are the phenomena. As Plato pointed out, all we get to actually see are the shadows on the wall.
ruveyn
Depends what you mean with "reality". We can make the the following statements:
1) There exists "something" which causes phenomenological sensations (e. g. light, matter, energy)
2) This sensations are following certain pattern which able to reproduce
3) Those pattern we gave the name "natural laws"
4) Our mind does order those laws with the means of mathematics
Depends what you mean with "reality". We can make the the following statements:
1) There exists "something" which causes phenomenological sensations (e. g. light, matter, energy)
2) This sensations are following certain pattern which able to reproduce
3) Those pattern we gave the name "natural laws"
4) Our mind does order those laws with the means of mathematics
Kant Lives! But his synthetic a priori apodictic judgement is still bogus. The useful true things we know are synthetic and a posteriori. We have to look and measure to find out what is what.
ruveyn
Hi, my son has this aspergers and based on my experience of him over the past 13 years I believe there is something profound, if not spiritual, about this. At the age of three he awoke to tell me he had dreamt of a Thundebird who's wings were so large the ocean rose to meet them. He told me night rainbows came from his beak, but not daytime rainbows, night time rainbows. He told me they were called Aurora Borealis. He further went on to explain to me the entire phenomena of what Aurora Borealis were. He's also woke one morning to tell me how light moves and bends into a black hole. He has woken up to draw symbols of things from his dreams. He describes knowing things that can not be communicated by language. He is the purest individual I have ever come accross. He is unable to connect with those who are not pure in energy, heart or mind. He sees energy and reacts to it. He has a very hard time being around people with walls, facades or those who are not living and loving from an authentic place. I don't know what to call it. I am always curious, challenged and even frustrated by/for him. He has a hard time with this world, crying for hours when the oil spill in New Mexico happened. He didn't understand how people could go about normally with such distruction happening. He is not unemotional, although if one didn't know him one would think this. He is hypersensitive and overemotional if anything. He prefers the company of animals, who can blame him? I think he senses so much, he has to shut himself down in part just to cope. He tells me he can hear everyones conversation in a crowded room and the information is too much. Since I believe in science, physics, spirit, dimensions, energies I'd have to say yes, something is happening that we don't understand with these individuals. Something pure and definately evolved beyond our capacity to understand.
ruveyn will do stuff like that. I was once tempted to correct him in saying that I did not need to be corrected, but I did not think it worth it.
ruveyn is an Aspie and is genetically programmed to do stuff like that.
ruveyn
This is where my baby brother chimes in to accuse you of using AS to justify your [scilicet unacceptable] behavior.
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Many Asperger's cases unrelated to Kanner's autism IMO |
10 Feb 2024, 10:56 am |
Should we inform our romantic interests of our condition? |
Yesterday, 1:05 am |
Question about Asperger Syndrome and tem "Severe Asperger" |
29 Jan 2024, 11:37 pm |
Autism |
31 Jan 2024, 12:58 am |