Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

dellamatta t1_jc546pc wrote

The many-worlds interpretation is physicist's way of making philosophical commentary on subjective awareness. The fact that this interpretation immediately descends into logical nonsense should show us that subjective awareness can never be described in logical, rational terms, or even through the apparently all-encompassing lens of physicalism. Any wave function collapse interpretation quickly becomes philosophical rather than empirical in nature (note that empiricism is a subset of philosophy, not something that philosophy is contained within).

−3

dolphin37 t1_jc6ceyn wrote

Your comment seems kinda off. MWI isn’t a philosophical commentary. It’s a proposed solution to an empirical issue with quantum mechanics. It’s an interpretation of results we see in experiments. It’s entirely logical, not nonsense at all.

‘Any wave function collapse interpretation quickly becomes philosophical’ - one of the absolutely key tenets of MWI is that the wave function doesn’t collapse. Feels like you’re speaking about something you’ve not quite understood.

Not really understanding what you’re trying to say about subjective awareness or what you’re proposing that is tbh.

5

XiphosAletheria t1_jc5pd56 wrote

> subjective awareness can never be described in logical, rational terms, or

Well, given that all we have is our subjective awareness of things, and that we came up with logic and reason, that is sort of self-evidently false. What subjective awareness can't be described in is scientific terms, which is different. Science requires empirical observation, but we can't observe someone else's subjective awareness by directly. It also requires repeatability, but subjective awareness is too malleable for that.

0

dellamatta t1_jc5unmw wrote

Given that all we have is subjective awareness, and that we came up with logic and reason, that is self-evidently false? I don't understand your line of thinking here. Logic and reason is a subset of subjective awareness, as you say. So how can logic and reason describe subjective awareness in its totality? It can't - it can only ever point to it or hint at it in some way. That's the point I'm making. Furthermore, logic and reason aren't good mechanisms to explain this totality, as they are extremely rigid and limited subsets of it.

0