O Materialismo Cientifico é “Quase certamente Falso”? Livro a ler

xxxx

Da revista Scientific American:

Is Scientific Materialism “Almost Certainly False”?

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/is-scientific-materialism-almost-certainly-false/

Sobre o livro (comprado, lendo):

“… pseudo-scientific speculation such as multi-universe theoriesand the anthropic principle (which says that the universe must be as we observe it to be because otherwise we wouldn’t be here to observe it). ”

Discordo que por esta definição o principio antrópico possa ser considerado pseudo-ciência. Ele expressa a mais pura logica. O problema é que ainda não podermos observar o Universo inteiro no espaço que ele ocupa nem conhecemos sua historia inteira, no tempo que ela ocupa, portanto não podemos ainda saber como o Universo é.

Thomas Nagel, are so unimpressed with science that they are challenging its fundamental assumptions. In his new book Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False…

Comprei o livro.

A genuine theory of everything, he suggests, should make sense of the extraordinary fact that the universe “is waking up and becoming aware of itself.”

Ele esta acertando na intuição, apenas cometendo um pequeno equivoco. De fato, algo no Universo esta despertando e se tornando consciente de si mesmo. Mas não e o Universo, em sua totalidade física, como aglomerado de galaxias. E sim algo dentro do universo, que e o sistema universal, sendo gestado, para o qual o Universo com suas galaxias  faz a função de placenta ou liquido amniótico. Ou ainda de ovo cósmico.

xxxx

A genuine theory of everything, he suggests, should make sense of the extraordinary fact that the universe “is waking up and becoming aware of itself.” In other words, the theory should show that life, mind, morality and reason were not only possible but even inevitable, latent in the cosmos from its explosive inception. Nagel admits he has no idea what form such a theory would take; his goal is to point out how far current science is from achieving it.”

Acertou em cheio. Essa teoria já existe, e nela e mostrado que a vida, a mente, moral e razão são inevitáveis emergirem porque no Universo esta ocorrendo um processo de reprodução, de algo que já tem estes atributos. Apenas, em qualquer processo de reprodução, os atributos vão emergindo em tempos que já exista estrutura do feto, ou embrião, para abriga-los.

xxxx

I was a bit disappointed by the dry, abstract style of Mind and Cosmos. The book seems aimed primarily at philosophers and scientists—that is, professionals—rather than lay readers.

xxxx

Stuart Kauffman has postulated the existence of a new force that counteracts the universal drift toward disorder decreed by the second law of thermodynamics. Kauffman suspects that this anti-entropy force might account for the emergence and evolution of life. Nagel mentions Kauffman’s theory of “self-organization” in a footnote but doesn’t elaborate on it.

pesquisar isto

xxxxx

Philosopher David Chalmers, Nagel’s colleague at New York University,

Deveria tentar comunicar com o depto de filosofia da Universidade de New York, o Nagel trabalha la e a universidade tem fomentado congressos neste tema.

xxxxxx

Meu comentario postado na Scientific American, em 1/30/19

Austriak:

There is a theory in the way that Nagel wants: “The Universal Matrix/DNA Formula for All Natural Systems”, at my website. It was found when a naturalist philosopher returned to pristine nature at Amazon jungle to search a world view begining from zero again and applying the systemic method. From the Big Bang to human consciousness, everything explained by a unique evolutionary lineage. Nagel makes a mistake when saying that the Universe is waking up. It is not the Universe but something inside the Universe that is coming under development, a unique natural system, that already got the shape of atoms, galaxies, living cell and now is getting the shape as consciousness. Scientific materialism has turned on to be mystical, due urban artificial life, reductionism and no systemic approach, and clean laboratories, so, we need a return to real nature, it has the right answer.

 

 

Tags: ,