If it exists, it has atoms

[Willum]

So I am just putting this out there as a thought-provoker:

If something exists, it is composed of atoms or is an energy or force: Electromagnetic, Gravitational, Strong Nuclear Force, Weak Nuclear Force and Neutron Degeneracy.

Is there anything that is an exception to this conjecture?

[AgnosticBoy]

[Replying to post 8 by AgnosticBoy]

Consciousness was once banned from scientific study for this very problem.

Perhaps the ban was lifted because it was a type of head in the sand position to adopt.

Certainly the argument 'consciousness is an emergent property of matter, therefore indirectly consciousness is 'made of matter' is a misdirection.

Here's how Sam Harris would respond to that...

"Someone like Francis Crick said famously you’re nothing but a pack of neurons. And that misses the fact that half of the reality we’re talking about is the qualitative experiential side. So when you’re trying to study human consciousness, for instance, by looking at states of the brain, all you can do is correlate experiential changes with changes in brain states. But no matter how tight these correlations become, that never gives you license to throw out the first-person experiential side."

Source: or http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/consciousn ... gle-region

…………………..
David Chalmers coined the concept of 'strong emergence' to distinguish it from more simple/mundane forms of emergence. I've quoted from his bookshere. If you list the properties of the matter that makes up the brain and list the properties of consciousness, then you're left with a drastic difference. One simple difference is that one is observable and the other is not.

In my view, new laws of interaction need to be posited (and eventually verified, of course) to account for this emergence. This will take care of the 'interaction problem' which BOTH materialists and dualists need to resolve.

The answer to the OP question "Is there anything that is an exception to this conjecture?" has been answered.

I agree.

[FarWanderer]

So I am just putting this out there as a thought-provoker:

If something exists, it is composed of atoms or is an energy or force: Electromagnetic, Gravitational, Strong Nuclear Force, Weak Nuclear Force and Neutron Degeneracy.

Is there anything that is an exception to this conjecture?

Pain.

[AgnosticBoy]

So I am just putting this out there as a thought-provoker:

If something exists, it is composed of atoms or is an energy or force: Electromagnetic, Gravitational, Strong Nuclear Force, Weak Nuclear Force and Neutron Degeneracy.

Is there anything that is an exception to this conjecture?

Pain.

I believe that all subjective experience is on the table as a response to the OP. Even if we view the human brain as a computer, then I still don't know how a computer that's based on pure logic could ever have subjective experience (pain, feelings) and make subjective-based decisions (decisions based off of personal beliefs, faith, taste, feelings, etc.). Everything in a computer is analyzable from a third-person perspective because there's nothing subjective to its behavior.

[TSGracchus]

[Replying to post 13 by AgnosticBoy]

But a computer can monitor its own programming, invoking an error routine when an error is detected, and even, perhaps, correcting the error, and avoiding the the error in future calculations. In short, computers can be programmed to reprogram themselves and to be "self-aware". Of course they wouldn't do this by means of neurotransmitters and "pleasure/pain" but that would make their calculations more reliable, not less. They are in principle probably capable of surpassing human intelligence.
This technique is problematic because humans like to keep track of program changes and control them, and really like thinking that humans are the smartest kids on the planet.

Did you ever see the original movie version of The Day the Earth Stood Still? The technologically advanced aliens, recognizing their own inability to govern themselves, wisely turned over the enforcement of rules to machines, who were not to be swayed by hormones and bad logic.
I think I might prefer Gort to most of the human rulers I am aware of. I know I couldn't be trusted not to shoot all the religious folks, racists, and patriots.

[TSGracchus]

So I am just putting this out there as a thought-provoker:

If something exists, it is composed of atoms or is an energy or force: Electromagnetic, Gravitational, Strong Nuclear Force, Weak Nuclear Force and Neutron Degeneracy.

Is there anything that is an exception to this conjecture?

Pain.

Pain, as all sensation, is neurotransmitters at synapses. Pain can be induced or repressed by physical means. The "metaphysical" or "spiritual" fades and vanishes along with the "god of the gaps" as science learns and understands more and more.

[AgnosticBoy]

[Replying to post 13 by AgnosticBoy]

But a computer can monitor its own programming, invoking an error routine when an error is detected, and even, perhaps, correcting the error, and avoiding the the error in future calculations. In short, computers can be programmed to reprogram themselves and to be "self-aware". Of course they wouldn't do this by means of neurotransmitters and "pleasure/pain" but that would make their calculations more reliable, not less. They are in principle probably capable of surpassing human intelligence.
This technique is problematic because humans like to keep track of program changes and control them, and really like thinking that humans are the smartest kids on the planet.

Consciousness comes with some sense of knowledge, like realizing what you're looking at. It is possible to detect or look at something without realizing it, like when you're staring at something but your mind is elsewhere.
In a sense, this how I view what you're describing. The computer can detect but that doesn't mean that it knows or realizes anything because everything is performed via 'programming' - coded instructions for automatic [or unconscious] performances. Either way, nothing you said indicates that the computer is having a subjective experience.

[Still small]

So I am just putting this out there as a thought-provoker:

If something exists, it is composed of atoms or is an energy or force: Electromagnetic, Gravitational, Strong Nuclear Force, Weak Nuclear Force and Neutron Degeneracy.

Is there anything that is an exception to this conjecture?

Information


Have a good day!
Still small

[TSGracchus]

[Replying to post 16 by AgnosticBoy]

But if the computer is aware of its own state, and even the details of its own construction, is that not the definition of "self-aware"? Indeed, it might well be "aware" more completely of itself than you are. The trick, I think, would be to enable it to recognize that you are "self-aware".
Humans want to be special, but perhaps that desire leads them to misperceive reality.

[TSGracchus]

So I am just putting this out there as a thought-provoker:

If something exists, it is composed of atoms or is an energy or force: Electromagnetic, Gravitational, Strong Nuclear Force, Weak Nuclear Force and Neutron Degeneracy.

Is there anything that is an exception to this conjecture?

Information

But information is a pattern of energy/matter and a pattern cannot be cleft from its material manifestation. Perhaps you can provide an example of information without some physical basis?

[Still small]

But information is a pattern of energy/matter and a pattern cannot be cleft from its material manifestation. Perhaps you can provide an example of information without some physical basis?

I believe in an attempt to adhere to a purely materialistic understanding of reality you appear to insist upon combining "information" and its "medium". It is commonsense to differentiate information from its medium, because the information is not necessarily dependent on one particular medium, but can have integrity across diverse media. A message in morse code can be equally transmitted through light, sound, electricity etc. It isn't necessarily important for the recipient of the information through which medium it got transmitted, as the recipient is only concerned about the information itself.
An example of information is a the descriptive statement "It is a sunny day, today". You, currently are getting this information via your computer screen which is transmitting a code via electromagnetic forces. But neither the code nor the computer are the 'sunny day'., they are just the medium by which the information was transmitted to you. I could have just as easily have used a typewriter or pen or pencil and written the statement on a piece of paper, a piece of parchment, a piece of timber, plastic, scratched it into a piece of metal and sent it to you. I may have written it in English, French, Greek or hieroglyphics. I may have written it in binary. The information is the same regardless of the medium or coding by which it is transmitted. The medium or method of coding is not the information. The medium is not the 'sunny day'. I could have telephoned you, I could have recorded a voice message and sent it to you. I could have made a video and sent it via TAPE, DVDs, CD or USB. But they are not the 'sunny day'. I could have sent you a photograph or painted a picture or just included an icon of a 'smiley sun'. Or you could have come here and just looked out the window and received the same information. The information gained is not determined by the medium by which it is stored or transmitted. In fact, your eyes are receiving photons 'coded' according to that which is on your computer screen but the photons are not the information, they are just the medium. The information is 'it is a sunny day today'.
Information can be the cause of something, but in a way that defies physical realism. When someone acts on information, they are not necessarily physically compelled to do so. Even a threat of severe and real consequences is not a physical cause, but a piece of information.
The information, the knowledge gained is separate and independent from the medium via which it is stored or transmitted.
The information that it is (or was) a sunny day today is independent from the 'pattern of energy/matter' via which it was sent or received. In fact, the information that it was a sunny day today is real regardless of whether it was sent or received.

Have a good day!
Still small