It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
You may recall the Schrödinger's Cat paradox, which was first published in its "scientific form" in 1935 in Zeitschrift der Physick. However in his 1925 essay he recounts an ancient Sankhya Hindu paradox that, jazzed up with some technology, became the cat paradox. In that original form the paradox was cast in the form of two people, one looking at a garden, the other in a dark room. The modern equivalent would be one person looking in the box to see if the cat is alive or dead, while a second person waits out in the hall. As we discussed, in this modern form the state "collapses" for the first person while it does not collapse for the second person.
In 1925 Schrõdinger resolved that paradox the way the Vedantists did: he asserted that all consciousness is one. As he wrote:
"But it is quite easy to express the solution in words, thus: the plurality [of viewpoints] that we perceive is only "an appearance; it is not real. Vedantic philosophy, in which this is a fundamental dogma, has sought to clarify it by a number of analogies, one of the most attractive being the many-faceted crystal which, while showing hundreds of little pictures of what is in reality a single existent object, does not really multiply the object."
Here is another fragment of that essay:
"... you may suddenly come to see, in a flash, the profound rightness of the basic conviction of Vedanta: ... knowledge, feeling and choice are essentially eternal and unchangeable and numerically one in all men, nay in all sensitive beings."
Finally, Schrödinger himself makes an interesting analogy between Vedantic philosophy and modern physics:
"If finally we look back at that idea of Mach [that `the universe is not twice given'], we shall realize that it comes as near to the orthodox dogma of the Upanishads as it could possibly do without stating it expressis verbis. The external world and consciousness are one and the same thing."
Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by EnlightenUp
Eh, I'm not so sure it's the universe that imposes evolutionary rewards. Since you claimed that there is indeed empirical evidence that it does, I would appreciate you to cite sources for that evidence for my review.
Somebody is about to be really embarrased, and it ain't me:
Are you familiar with the founder of Quantum Mechanics, Schrodinger?
He resolved the Schrodinger's cat problem by introducing consciousness.
Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by donhuangenaro
the epic fail of modern materialistic science is its' refusal to take the consciousness into account about life and the universe...
What do you mean? Science does study consciousness.
and the fact is scientists couldn't invent so many theories, or anything, if there was no (self)consciousness in the first place...
Ah, another ATS user who loves to argue correlation proves causation.
why is it so hard to accept this simple fact for so many people?
Because it's a logical fallacy, and most intelligent people try to avoid such things as much as possible.
you would be a mindless zombie without conscious mind...
I propose we are indeed mindless zombies without a conscious mind.
A philosophical zombie, p-zombie or p-zed is a hypothetical being that is indistinguishable from a normal human being except that it lacks conscious experience, qualia, or sentience. When a zombie is poked with a sharp object, for example, it does not feel any pain. While it behaves exactly as if it does feel pain (it may say "ouch" and recoil from the stimulus, or tell us that it is in intense pain), it does not actually have the experience of pain as a putative 'normal' person does.
In a sense, that would be "acknowledging the conscious" in a way that is obviously not always done.
Originally posted by Matrix Rising
reply to post by Indigo_Child
You are making some great points.
There's no evidence that an objective, material reality exists. This is assumed by many scientist though because they have a strong faith in materialism.
What they will tell you is that we will find a theory one day that will explain how things like consciouness and self-awareness sprang up from dead, dumb matter.
They will say these things just "appear" this way.
For instance, nobody has ever touched matter. When you touch a table, the electrons from your hand and the electrons from the table repel against each other and you perceive this as hardness.
Science is still trying to prove that you are touching something real. Your perception of reality makes it real. They just have a strong, misguided faith in materialism.
Science supports Idealism, many scientist believe in Materialism.