There cannot be any emergence

[Logik]

You need a human and salt in the case you want to see what is the taste of salt. So the whole is human and salt.

OK, so you have re-defined the boundary of the "whole". How many "wholes" are there ?

A lot.

So you are a pluralist.

I am a monist. There is only one whole and many conceptions of "parts".

[bahman]

OK, so you have re-defined the boundary of the "whole". How many "wholes" are there ?

A lot.

So you are a pluralist.

I am a monist. There is only one whole and many conceptions of "parts".

Bu you can make distinction between yourself and the rest.

[Logik]

Bu you can make distinction between yourself and the rest.

I can make a lot of distinctions.

[bahman]

Bu you can make distinction between yourself and the rest.

I can make a lot of distinctions.

Then in your opinion how the whole can manifest itself to distinct things?

[bahman]

Bu you can make distinction between yourself and the rest.

I can make a lot of distinctions.

Then in your opinion how the whole can manifest itself to distinct things?

[Logik]

Then in your opinion how the whole can manifest itself to distinct things?

Phenomenological bracketing. It's artificial and pragmatic.

The whole is too complex for us, so we understand it by cutting it up into smaller chunks, but at the back of my head I know the chunks are artificial.

[bahman]

Then in your opinion how the whole can manifest itself to distinct things?

Phenomenological bracketing. It's artificial and pragmatic.

The whole is too complex for us, so we understand it by cutting it up into smaller chunks.

But no one have access to your mind until you write things down.

[Logik]

But no one have access to your mind until you write things down.

I have access to my mind. I am not no one.

[bahman]

But no one have access to your mind until you write things down.

I have access to my mind. I am not no one.

Yes, only you have access to your mind. That applies to other people. Therefore the universe is separable to different things.

[Logik]

Yes, only you have access to your mind. That applies to other people. Therefore the universe is separable to different things.

Physicists would call that a firewall, but I would hardly call my mind a black hole.

If you so wanted you can stick me in to an MRI machine (or any high-resolution imaging system) and copy my brain. That you can't deciper the contents of my mind is just you lacking knowledge of the appropriate decoding function.

Either way - your argument is moot. You are welcome to split up the universe into 2 or 222222222222222222^22222222222222 parts.

If you want to understand it - you can only understand it as a whole.

If you insist on a "Clockwork universe" conception then you have to overcome the Margolus-Levitin theorem.

[bahman]

Yes, only you have access to your mind. That applies to other people. Therefore the universe is separable to different things.

Physicists would call that a firewall, but I would hardly call my mind a black hole.

If you so wanted you can stick me in to an MRI machine (or any high-resolution imaging system) and copy my brain. That you can't deciper the contents of my mind is just you lacking knowledge of the appropriate decoding function.

You then need a brain similar to yours in order to decode what is going on inside your brain assuming that MRI can give you everything which is happening inside your brain. Each brain is unique in the way that it is structured.

[Logik]

Each brain is unique in the way that it is structured.

You are practically claiming that all brains store information differently. Do you have evidence for this claim?

You then need a brain similar to yours in order to decode what is going on inside your brain assuming that MRI can give you everything which is happening inside your brain.

You could perform the experiment on yourself first. And then you can perform it on me.
If an MRI has insufficient fidelity - then invent a teleportation machine. Theoretically it's possible.

If your decoding function works on my brain then your claim is falsified.

[bahman]

Each brain is unique in the way that it is structured.

You are practically claiming that all brains store information differently. Do you have evidence for this claim?

Of course. The way that each brain is structured is the result of whole life experience which this is unique for each person. There is also element of genetics which make two brains different from each other.

You then need a brain similar to yours in order to decode what is going on inside your brain assuming that MRI can give you everything which is happening inside your brain.

You could perform the experiment on yourself first. And then you can perform it on me. It might just work which would falsify this claim.

Your brain is different from mine. We don't have access to decoder. MRI cannot provide all processes which carry inside your brain.

[Logik]

Of course. The way that each brain is structured is the result of whole life experience which this is unique for each person. There is also element of genetics which make two brains different from each other.

And? Both you and I understand the meaning of the word "cat". Bot you and I imagine a similar picture in our heads.

So somewhere in our brains there is wiring/circuitry to convert words to images and images to words.
So some of our experiences may have been different, but some of our experiences are clearly the same.

We don't have access to decoder. MRI cannot provide all processes which carry inside your brain.

You draw no distinction between practical and theoretical limits. Jesus didn't have access to airplanes either, but had he said "humans can't fly" he would've eaten his own words some time around the early 20th century.

If you are going to claim "impossibility" you better demonstrate some law of physics being violated.

[Logik]

Therefore the universe is separable to different things.

By the way... the moment you make this claim you contradict the impossibility of emergence.

You are arguing for local realism which is tantamount to a rejection of quantum non-locality, which is also a rejection of Bell's inequalities.

Ironically - according to Bell's inequalities hidden variables (and therefore - local realism) are impossible quantum interpretations.

Didn't you have a PhD in physics or something?