
Physics Is Pointing Inexorably to Mind - cmsefton
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/physics-is-pointing-inexorably-to-mind/
======
yummypaint
The article admits this view isnt falsifiable. It's a fun idea but it is a
dissapointment to see such a misleading title in scientific american.

In a sense, the idea that only the content of a model matters has always been
present in science. Does an electron really exist? Who knows, but people have
models which make use of a concept called an electron and they are testable
and have superb predictive power. I dont see that this article offers any
meaningful contributions to the current understanding.

------
woodandsteel
"The mental universe exists in mind but not in your personal mind alone.
Instead, it is a transpersonal field of mentation that presents itself to us
as physicality—with its concreteness, solidity and definiteness—once our
personal mental processes interact with it through observation."

If that is the case, then why do we need material brains to think?

This is just Platonism dressed up in different language.

~~~
drdeca
To me it sounded like George Berkeley's Idealism.

It even says "that the universe is a mental construct displayed on the screen
of perception" which sounds quite like how I've heard Berkeley's Idealism
described, with God presenting us with the-world-as-our-experiences-of-it .

~~~
woodandsteel
I agree, you could certainly say it sounds like Berkeley. What Berkeley and
Platonism have in common is they are metaphysical idealisms.

------
nabla9
Replacing seemingly elusive concept of X with more concrete and better defined
concept of Y seems like a good starting point.

X != Y and X in {mind, information}, Y in {mind, information}

For me Kastrup's consciousness-only ontology suffers even more from
elusiveness and hand waving.

