19th century scientists, and those before and early 20th century ones, were still the both. Newton had interest in alchemy, Einstein strongly believed in god (though I discreet with his view on creativity), and Mach had a strong philosophical bend. Where are the present-day counterparts of Bolzmann, Schrõdinger, Bohr, Newton, etc.

Maybe we can count Bohm, Capra, Penrose, and many more as such. Luckily they are still there.

It's a fact that I lie
It's a lie if not
As a matter of fact
Matter is fact
Does it matter?
If it's a lie?
If it's true?
Are these words facts?
Who's the judge?
Judge fictionfact
Judging facts are guilty
Contaminated with fantasy
Fantasy with lies
All entangled to
Collapse to one
Of many actual
Actuality of facts
Superimposed
Ooooh you facts
With the power to
Set us free
Or imprison us
Imprison us in your
Tender factual cage
Free us from
Your eternal painful grip
As
A fact of matter

The body, me or you or anyone, is the agent. Brains and the physical world are aids for us to live. How beautiful creation is! Rejoyce! Hallejuhuha!

I have no problem with the equivalence of matter and information — Mersi

They are not equivalent. Matter can exist and a matter arrangement (a form like a Platonic object) can carry information. You can even say the form is the (non-entropic) information but this is not equivalent to matter (whatever matter may be).

Just a wild guess. Am I right? Go on, don't be bashful. — Wayfarer

Yes, you are right. But I have a suspicion...

I many cases I can tell by physical appearance if someone is jewish. They are Kaukasian but have distinct features.

It's a great book, a classic. Bet you knew nothing about it until this thread (and still don't). — Wayfarer

Why do you think that I dont know the book? Its a typical book meant to assimilate.

. Of course, there are secular Jews, even atheist Jews like Harari, but they lie somewhat outside of the instant discussion, right? — Michael Zwingli

Are there? Really? Who would have thought that?

The complementarity principle is just that one object may possess pairs of properties such that only one but not both can be observed/measured at a time — TheMadFool

Both can be measured at the same time. All properties can be measured at the same time.

Usual meaning?! Well, I have never met this word used in the way you define it! I also looked, specially for that, in a couple of standard dictionaries and I found nothing, not even close to that definition! BTW, it is very close to that of "free will" and self-determination. — Alkis Piskas

An agency is that possessing agents. I am an agent and at the same time I am an agency as I possess my body. My brain and the physical world are necessary. I (my body) can't do without them and kuckily I'm tied to both. The brain is my (and your is your) inner world, an expressing of the non-material aspect of stuff) and the outer world is the expression of stuff's material side. What is matter? More than matter! It's magic stuff. Outside you can see the difference and inside you can feel the difference..

People were unable to fathom the full consequences of their decisions. — Yuval Noah Harari (Sapiens), explaining why humanity is a scourge for the earth

People have marshmellow brains.

A lot of Buddhists would answer 'no'. But the first real in-depth book on Buddhist philosophy I read was The Central Philosophy of Buddhism by T.R.V. Murti. He was an Indian scholar who had trained at Oxford, and the book has many in-depth comparisons between Buddhist and European philosophy, especially Kant. See this. — Wayfarer

That book is yet another attempt to incorporate non-western philosophy into western, highly abstract philosophies. To put a western umbrella on top of them. It's not a translation but an eating to digest them and shit out Kantian ideas.

You think animals are used only to eat them or as a tool?

Well, I have a couple of explanations for that kind of "philosophical" behavior that characterizes these people.
(Note: I am referring to the people who have something valuable and pertinent to say, not the weeds, the clueless those who have nothing to do with philosophy and are here for fun, neither the really crazy guys, those who have gone nuts. And there are quite a few of them in here! — Alkis Piskas

Are you one of the crazy guys? :smile: No, seriously: what do you think is matter? There are quantum fields of (nearly) point particles and these fields interact by means of gauge fields. This interaction is needed. Otherwise the fields waver out into infinity (or to a point, in auxiliary momentum space representation). The fields can form global and local patterns and on our neural network virtually ALL processes and forms can be present.

and as a consequence, raped a physicist — Wayfarer

"Excitation" wrongly interpreted as "to jump on"...

and as a consequence, raped a physicist. :lol: — Wayfarer

:rofl:

I started a thread on that some time back. Landauer is in the ‘information science’ business, he was a senior scientist at IBM. So he could tell you in very precise terms how many bits of data the Complete Works of Plato would require, and the energy requirements of storing it or erasing it. But he wouldn’t necessarily have anything to say about its content. — Wayfarer

The information contained in a book about a love adventure is about the same as that in a book on quantum fields in curved spacetime. If both books contain about the same number of letters. This equality can be expressed in an equality of numbers. Entropy of book one is the same as entropy of book two. If we look at the letters only (the entropy of the physical books not included). Both books are entirely different though. An alien wouldn't (yet) be able to discern between books.