~DOWNLOAD KINDLE ♶ Galileo's Error: Foundations for a New Science of Consciousness ♾ PDF or E-pub free

~DOWNLOAD KINDLE ♭ Galileo's Error: Foundations for a New Science of Consciousness ♼ If we want a science of consciousness, we will have to rethink what science isUnderstanding how brains produce consciousness is one of the great scientific challenges of our age Some philosophers argue that the mystery is so deep it will never be solved Others believe our standard scientific methods for investigating the brain will eventually produce an answerIn Galileo s Error, Professor Philip Goff proposes a third way, arguing both approaches are wrongheaded we struggle to explain consciousness because physical science, as we currently conceive it, is not designed to deal with the issueExplaining how Galileo s flawed philosophy of nature created the problem of consciousness in the first place, Goff shows convincingly what we need to do to solve itControversial, stimulating and ahead of its time, Galileo s Error is an important step towards a complete vision of reality Consciousness Is this based on my Experience or some invisible force gives pressure to my brain to take action or Is this just mere observer for my rational actions behaviors How Science going to help us for our philosophical quest or vice versa,how can we experience something when we knew only the meaning of it What actually title of this book supposed to do with these questions Father of Modern Science Galileo define universe in mathematical perspective as size,shape,location,motion Concrete n Consciousness Is this based on my Experience or some invisible force gives pressure to my brain to take action or Is this just mere observer for my rational actions behaviors How Science going to help us for our philosophical quest or vice versa,how can we experience something when we knew only the meaning of it What actually title of this book supposed to do with these questions Father of Modern Science Galileo define universe in mathematical perspective as size,shape,location,motion Concrete nouns and rest of the qualitative terms Abstract nouns remains subjective and science never going to answer for these.because its nothing but an illusion.Then how are we so conscious to perceive these Integrated informational theory Neuro science predicts our behavior due to chemical reactions in brain,in future they may get answers to many insoluble questions of the present.but actually these all comes under Easy problems and why all these happens comes under Hard problem.What if each particle has its own consciousness or few particles dissolve into one another to create new one to form consciousness.Remember senses alone are not part of this but particles Panpsychism.Is this The hardest hard problem Combination problem Author pointed out many analogies over various hypothesis on Science and philosophy I took all these remains at the state of superposition until it observed but ended up with Formless consciousness which every conscious beings doings aspire to be,its simply sort of stop think about consciousness and be a part in universe s particle to feel the nature Is this really Ochkam s Razor s simplicity But the most insoluble question is what am just a physical thing acting conceiving commands as like object stand between Consciousness acts as a force past experience and Result Future Starts off well with a good description of past and present theories of consciousness, but once panpsychism is introduced, things start to go downhill Materialism is criticized because it cannot explain the qualitative aspects of consciousness, and dualism because there is no neurological evidence of a link between the brain and a disembodied mind Fair enough But what hard evidence is there that everything in the universe is conscious Indeed, how could we ever determine this If we re not al Starts off well with a good description of past and present theories of consciousness, but once panpsychism is introduced, things start to go downhill Materialism is criticized because it cannot explain the qualitative aspects of consciousness, and dualism because there is no neurological evidence of a link between the brain and a disembodied mind Fair enough But what hard evidence is there that everything in the universe is conscious Indeed, how could we ever determine this If we re not allowed to use quantitative science to investigate this the use of such quantitative methods is the Galileo s error of the title , then how can we investigate it Unless I missed something, this question is never answered in the book If we can t demonstrate objectively that this low level consciousness exists, then panpsychism relies on faith, and becomes just another religion One would think that we are quite far off from getting to know consciousness, that we are in the dark Nothing is further from the truth given the progress of neuroscience Sure, we haven t cracked the code yet but there are promising approaches to tackle a unifying theory.One of these approaches is panpsychism Crazy as it sounds, there is strong neuroscientific backing within the IIT community IIT stands for Integrated Information Theory and there, scientists predict how information integrati One would think that we are quite far off from getting to know consciousness, that we are in the dark Nothing is further from the truth given the progress of neuroscience Sure, we haven t cracked the code yet but there are promising approaches to tackle a unifying theory.One of these approaches is panpsychism Crazy as it sounds, there is strong neuroscientific backing within the IIT community IIT stands for Integrated Information Theory and there, scientists predict how information integration affects the manifestation of conscious brain states Turns out that theintegrated part of the brain, theconscious capabilities does it display That is indeed promising and exciting, as some IIT theorists conclude that if IIT is necessarily true, then panpsychism is true All this entails that consciousness might be the fundamental characteristic of matter, and theintegrated information structures like that of humans, animals or plants are, the greater their capacity for conscious thought Recent, mindblowing research on plant life and communication confirms that such may the case.In such a system, there are either phenomenal or proto phenomenal qualities that combine to greater conscious experience Such a system, if true, is the solution for the everlasting quarrel between materialists and dualists it is their natural synthesis and offers a fully unified theory.Philip Goff does a great job at explaining the roots of the current ill conditioned state of materialistic science, and how the alternative of panpsychism arose among physicists in the XX century The very discovery of quantum mechanics and the wave function collapsing due to conscious human observation changed everything Von Neumann was of an opinion that it is a clear manifestation of a missing piece consciousness Another great astronomer physicist Arthur Eddington who uncovered and popularised Einstein s theory of relativity wrote a book The Nature Of The Physical World that was the first serious attempt to describe consciousness as an intrinsic feature of matter Together with Bertrand Russell, they both wrote interesting things on the possibility of panpsychism.Goff also concluded that if panpsychism turns true it might have colossal implications for environment and ecology especially theserious strain of ecology deep ecology All of this is relevant due to the present day outcome of the Enlightenment project that along with modernism created the image of Anthropocene which in turn spawned consumerism, destroying the ecosystem of the planet.I wholeheartedly recommend this book, you will never look at grass the same again after reading it The first two sections are a very good read Goff explains consciousness as defined by various schools of thought, and sets them against each other Dualism, Materialism, Illusionism, Zombieism, Phenomenal Concept Theory, and Panpsychism He is very patient, and very clear, choosing a few examples and then walking us through, using thought experiments to convey the subtle distinctions.The weakest part of the book is the third section because Goff attempts to summarize ALL of the world s spirit The first two sections are a very good read Goff explains consciousness as defined by various schools of thought, and sets them against each other Dualism, Materialism, Illusionism, Zombieism, Phenomenal Concept Theory, and Panpsychism He is very patient, and very clear, choosing a few examples and then walking us through, using thought experiments to convey the subtle distinctions.The weakest part of the book is the third section because Goff attempts to summarize ALL of the world s spiritual traditions as being the viewpoint of a group he calls mystics, and Goff tries to connect their views with the Western panpsychists who operateor less in the mainstream scientific community I really enjoyed reading this book and engaging with the arguments in it, and it was a good, and not overly partisan introduction to issues relating to consciousness However, I disagreed with almost all aspects of the central argument of the book The author tries hard to distinguish himself from New Age philosophies, but by the second last and most of all last chapter, it becomes clear that underneath the philosophical curtain lies what is, at its core, New Age philosophy I felt that there wa I really enjoyed reading this book and engaging with the arguments in it, and it was a good, and not overly partisan introduction to issues relating to consciousness However, I disagreed with almost all aspects of the central argument of the book The author tries hard to distinguish himself from New Age philosophies, but by the second last and most of all last chapter, it becomes clear that underneath the philosophical curtain lies what is, at its core, New Age philosophy I felt that there was a bit of confusion between consciousness and free will early on, and real confusion about the observer effect in quantum mechanics, which is so often something relied upon in these sorts of arguments Ultimately, I began the book not knowing what I thought about consciousness but I ve ended it thinking that the main arguments the author dismisses dualism and materialism areplausible than his own argument Hats off to any book that tries to bring very complex philosophical arguments down to non philosophy graduates, and this book does a fairly good job of outlining dualism, materialism, and panpsychism I can understand why some would have liked to have seenof the deeper discussion and argument of those positions, but that wasn t the purpose of the book Itor less does the job it set out to do, but I would have liked itif it had finished the chapters with a slightlyopen sta Hats off to any book that tries to bring very complex philosophical arguments down to non philosophy graduates, and this book does a fairly good job of outlining dualism, materialism, and panpsychism I can understand why some would have liked to have seenof the deeper discussion and argument of those positions, but that wasn t the purpose of the book Itor less does the job it set out to do, but I would have liked itif it had finished the chapters with a slightlyopen stance The perennial paradox underlying this book consciousness is a vividly real subjective experience, yet science cannot explain it Does that mean consciousness is an illusion produced by brain mechanics, or that science s self imposed parameters render it incapable of exploring some of the world s realities Goff explores the history, science, philosophy, and arguments of both answers, which often fall into one of two camps Materialists say that everything that exists boils down to physics, while The perennial paradox underlying this book consciousness is a vividly real subjective experience, yet science cannot explain it Does that mean consciousness is an illusion produced by brain mechanics, or that science s self imposed parameters render it incapable of exploring some of the world s realities Goff explores the history, science, philosophy, and arguments of both answers, which often fall into one of two camps Materialists say that everything that exists boils down to physics, while dualists postulate a spiritual, non physical reality coexisting with the physical More recently, a third hypothesis avoids both materialism and dualism Panpsychism holds that consciousness is a fundamental quality of all matter Goff allies himself with panpsychism, in part because it avoids many of the internal inconsistences and paradoxes of the first two.The author does a good job of explaining the history, current status, and pros and cons of each camp It s not his fault, but many of the arguments on all sides seem riddled with hair splitting, semantics, and bizarre proofs that seem too far up the garden path to be a good proof of anything The proof that materialism is wrong is so circuitous that it suggests logical sleight of hand Yet he puts materialism on the defensive by demonstrating that while physics has gotten very good at predicting what physical objects and systems will do, when, and to what degree, it can t explain the intrinsic nature of those objects and systems and so is in a somewhat similar pickle to those who have a hard time coming up with a useful definition of consciousness As Goff acknowledges, his chains of logic are coherent but not waterproof the most parsimonious explanation isn t necessarily the correct one But in following the arguments, you get a good immersion in the various ideas.One concept seemed to be missing from Goff s survey a branch of panpsychism that holds that consciousness isn t inherent in all matter but only in living matter as explained in Stuart A Kauffman s A World Beyond Physics , which goes a long way in explaining why living matter behaves so differently than inanimate matter It might also explain why the most complex computer in the world may never be at all conscious Galileo s Error seems to have its own logical error right from the beginning in stating that the experience of consciousness with a sense of self proves the existence of the self as a conscious being The experience may prove that there is consciousness and a sense of self, but the discrete conscious being could easily be an illusion However, I m not sure this has much impact on what Goff explains in the rest of the book.This book s branching tree of ideas about consciousness also makes a mostly implicit point that may be disturbing for anyone searching for any kind of philosophical certainty It s impossible to prove anything true, and the best we can hope for is to shed ourselves of ideas no matter how much we love them, no matter what comfort they bring us that can be proven false Consciousness is one of the deepest and most perplexing unresolved mysteries of the universe and it would take a fool to believe that we already have a conclusive explanation or that we even know what an explanation would look like If we re honest, we can t even be sure the problem is soluble at all, or whether it is best addressed through better neuroscience or through a conceptual reimagining of the universe So the place I start when rating books like this is in regard to whether or not the Consciousness is one of the deepest and most perplexing unresolved mysteries of the universe and it would take a fool to believe that we already have a conclusive explanation or that we even know what an explanation would look like If we re honest, we can t even be sure the problem is soluble at all, or whether it is best addressed through better neuroscience or through a conceptual reimagining of the universe So the place I start when rating books like this is in regard to whether or not the author seems to understand the inherent complexity of the topic Consciousness is simply not the place for dogmatism, and a little humility goes a long way Fortunately, philosopher Philip Goff is anything but dogmatic, and presents his ideas carefully and thoroughly without any pretentiousness As you might expect, someone who has been studying the topic for 20 years knows enough about it to not be overconfident in his or her beliefs Unlike other authors with last names beginning with Harris, Goff gives a fair evaluation and critique to the competing positions and philosophers who would tend to disagree with him The intellectual history of and literature on consciousness is vast and complex and frankly most books on the topic don t do it justice Make no mistake, this is a book for a popular audience and only so much can be covered in a couple hundred pages, but Goff does a commendable job of presenting the major arguments and counterarguments for each approach to the understanding of consciousness Goff s hypothesis is compelling first, he notes how physical science has been unsuccessful in its attempt to explain consciousness because Galileo, the father of physical science, placed consciousness and its associated qualitative characteristics based on experiences and feelings beyond the reach of physical science As Galileo wrote in 1632 Philosophy natural philosophy or science is written in this grand book I mean the universe which stands continually open to our gaze, but it cannot be understood unless one first learns to comprehend the language in which it is written It is written in the language of mathematics, and its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometric figures, without which it is humanly impossible to understand a single word of it without these, one is wandering about in a dark labyrinth Galileo effectively removed subjective experience and sensory qualities essentially, consciousness from the study of science The universe was to be understood quantitatively, with qualitative aspects like senses and emotions and feeling relegated to human curiosities that have no impact on our true understanding of the cosmos It is no surprise then thatand better neuroscience is getting us nowhere closer to an understanding of qualitative experience of which consciousness consists when it is founded on a mathematical basis that only considers quantity, magnitude, and cause and effect relationships As Goff points out, nobody wants to be a dualist unless they really have to because it introduces added complexity and brings up the further problem of how an immaterial mind can possibly interact with the physical brain But a simple aversion to dualism does not automatically make materialism the default correct answer If we have trouble understanding the interaction between an immaterial mind and a physical brain, we have even greater difficulty imagining how an arrangement of neurons can experience the sensation of being in pain If neuroscience has not solved the problem yet, it seems implausible thatof the same will get us anywhere closer, as Goff maintains At the heart of materialism lies a deep contradiction Materialism cannot account for subjective experience, because, as we saw, physical science removed subjective experience from its realm of investigation The only recourse is for the materialist to deny that subjective experience exists at all In response to the idea that subjective experience is an illusion, philosopher Galen Strawson calls this the silliest claim ever made Strawson further points out that the trouble with asserting that consciousness is an illusion is that any such illusion is already and necessarily an instance of the thing said to be an illusion Materialists want to make the claim that my subjective experience is an illusion, yet that illusion must itself be subjectively experienced So what s the solution We don t want to be dualists, but the contradictions of materialism seem to force us into that position But belief in an immaterial mind seems little better than believing in magic, and offers no explanation for the mind s interaction with the brain Is there a third way It turns out there is, and it was originally championed, to my surprise, by Betrand Russell in his book The Analysis of Matter The philosophy goes by the name of panpsychism, and asserts that consciousness is a fundamental property of matter, present in varying degrees based on the complexity of the life form This is an interesting position as it seems to avoid the problems of dualism by locating consciousness within the brain, while also avoiding the problem of materialism by not denying the existence of subjective experience Goff provides one of the best and clearest accounts of the panpsychist position I ve seen, and his examples of promising lines of research are fascinating and compelling However, it s hard to get too excited yetHere s my main problem with panpsychism I m having difficulty seeing how it is not merely a different form of dualism in disguise If consciousness is inherent in matter, then this means that, in addition to whatever physical properties it may have, it also has immaterial properties, for that is what consciousness is Unless Goff is maintaining that the physical world is an illusion, and that only consciousness exists which I don t think he is then there is still a DUAL aspect to reality Only now, dualism is not confined exclusively to brains it s present everywhere This is a kind of out of control dualism with all the same problems Whether you say that an immaterial mind interacts WITH matter or an immaterial consciousness is inherent IN matter doesn t seem to make much of a difference You still can t account for how consciousness interacts with the physical world Are conscious experiences happening in parallel with physical processes or can one cause changes in the other The panpsychist has no better answer than the dualist, to my mind This is why I m skeptical that the problem can ever be resolved It s not that it s too difficult it s that the answer seems to lie in the solution to a paradox that our minds are not wired to handle Further, if we can never experience different degrees of consciousness, then how can we verify or falsify whether or not they exist And if we can t, then in what sense can panpsychism count as a solution In any case, I won t fault the author for failing to conclusively solve the most perplexing philosophical issue in the history of the subject or for pursuing new lines of inquiry While I m not yet convinced that we can solve the problem of consciousness, I m glad to see we re not giving up on the attempt Who knows where it will one day lead Nothing like smashing through a full book during a long day of travel This book is an obvious 5 star before the final two chapters Perhaps the best follow up to Annaka Harris s book that discusses the plausibility of panpsychism and possible implications that are beginning to be consideredandseriously in the field.