Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest


Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.

Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discuss

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fnd.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Dizhechko Semyonovich: on 4/7/17 at 3:30am UTC, wrote Dear Sirs! Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of...

George Gantz: on 4/5/17 at 13:17pm UTC, wrote Hugo - Thank you for the excellent and thoughtful essay. I wish you had...

Don Limuti: on 3/30/17 at 22:37pm UTC, wrote Hi Hugo, This is an interesting essay that is very different than the...

Joe Fisher: on 3/16/17 at 15:40pm UTC, wrote Dear Hugo Pérez Ramírez, Please excuse me for I have no intention of...

Simon DeDeo: on 3/15/17 at 5:38am UTC, wrote Dear Hugo, I appreciated your unconventional approach to the problem. ...

Hugo Pérez Ramírez: on 3/13/17 at 22:44pm UTC, wrote Essay Abstract Are there Explanations in terms of desires and...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joseph Campbell: "American and Chinese astrophysicists have suggested that by studying the..." in Multiversal Journeys'...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Georgina, Reality has got nothing to do with how I try to roughly..." in Quantum Dream Time

Georgina Woodward: "Joe, I think I ought to word my reply my precisely. I saw the product..." in Quantum Dream Time

austin fearnley: "You could investigate using the Rasch Model to grade the entries. There..." in What Is...

Watson waston: "Great and beautiful work is done by. You publish a detailed and informative..." in Kwiat’s Kwest:...

John Cox: "Good to know, Johnathan, thanks. I'm writing that down, hardcopy! Hope you..." in Conjuring a Neutron Star...

Jonathan Dickau: "To John and others lured in by such offers... My dad fell prey to this..." in Conjuring a Neutron Star...

Watson waston: "The information is very good and very useful. I really like it and I am..." in Kwiat’s Kwest:...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Quantum Dream Time
Defining a ‘quantum clock’ and a 'quantum ruler' could help those attempting to unify physics—and solve the mystery of vanishing time.

Our Place in the Multiverse
Calculating the odds that intelligent observers arise in parallel universes—and working out what they might see.

Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Phenomena
A bench-top experiment could test the notion that gravity breaks delicate quantum superpositions.

Watching the Observers
Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

Bohemian Reality: Searching for a Quantum Connection to Consciousness
Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?


FQXi FORUM
November 20, 2017

CATEGORY: Wandering Towards a Goal Essay Contest (2016-2017) [back]
TOPIC: Are There Personal Explanations whitout Persons? by Hugo Pérez Ramírez [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Hugo Pérez Ramírez wrote on Mar. 13, 2017 @ 22:44 GMT
Essay Abstract

Are there Explanations in terms of desires and reasons without referring to persons? I argue that there are. Events which refer to desires and reasons without persons are not only possible, but also there are instantiated in every system that tend to order and process information.

Author Bio

Hugo Pérez Ramírez as a postgraduate student of philosophy in the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile has researched several field as Philosophy of Physics, Logic, Philosophy of language, Metaphysics, and Philosophy of Religion.

Download Essay PDF File




Simon DeDeo wrote on Mar. 15, 2017 @ 05:38 GMT
Dear Hugo,

I appreciated your unconventional approach to the problem.

The question of when a system has not just goals or desires, but also "reasons for", seems particularly interesting. I think most would accept that the fitness function in an evolutionary model provides the (illusion of) a goal for a population, or at least a signal of differential goal-achievement.

But it is certainly the case that evolution doesn't give organisms "reasons for" doing something. They do them, or do not, and thrive accordingly. Your rational choice example of there being reasons-for is nice; yet it's not directly applicable because it's a model we build ourselves. We're using rational choice to determine reasons for doing something, but that's because we're interested in reasons. How does that reason-making itself arise? I think you punt a bit on this one, cramming it into the last two paragraphs.

Years ago I was at a lecture where speaker suggested that the neutron "calculated its mass every X nanoseconds" (or something). We (a roomful of physicists) were all mystified about what he meant--he was trying to make a too-cute point about how long it took *us* to calculate the mass using computers. In the end I think he was wrong: it is one thing to be X, or have property X; another to infer, calculate, or compute it. I think you make a similar slip in the last two paragraphs.

Perhaps I'm missing something here. You've taken an approach that reminds me of my data with the analytic philosophers. One of their great virtues, in addition to high alcohol tolerance, is to take a non-scientific idea like "having a reason for doing something" and just relentlessly refusing to cash it out in scientific terms.

Yours,

Simon

report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Mar. 16, 2017 @ 15:40 GMT
Dear Hugo Pérez Ramírez,

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

report post as inappropriate


Don Limuti wrote on Mar. 30, 2017 @ 22:37 GMT
Hi Hugo,

This is an interesting essay that is very different than the others in its conclusion.

If I got you correctly, you are saying that "there is a parallelism between the systems that tend to order and the personal explanations that describe behaviour towards goals."

Then you say: "Furthermore, I would say that such physical information makes those personal explanations irreducible to scientific explanations." "The desires and reasons which can be attributed to physical events lacking a person are not the same that the description of the physical causes and conditions occurring in said events. the systems processes the information and therefore refers to something beyond matter."

In other words: People are fundamentally different from machines. And, AI is a futurist goal...but we may be limited to machine augmentation. Did I understand you correctly?

I like your essay....Thank you,

Don Limuti

report post as inappropriate


George Gantz wrote on Apr. 5, 2017 @ 13:17 GMT
Hugo -

Thank you for the excellent and thoughtful essay. I wish you had written more!

I have made a similar claim In my essay (The How and The Why of Emergence and Intention) about the existence of reasons (intention) without persons (agents), and that these intentions are fundamental to the operation of the universe at all levels - physical as well as biological .

You may also be amused to know that I also have called upon the typing monkeys and their production of Hamlet!

Sincere regards - George Gantz

report post as inappropriate


Dizhechko Boris Semyonovich wrote on Apr. 7, 2017 @ 03:30 GMT
Dear Sirs!

Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of Newton returned as the New Cartesian Physic and promises to be a theory of everything. To tell you this good news I use spam.

New Cartesian Physic based on the identity of space and matter. It showed that the formula of mass-energy equivalence comes from the pressure of the Universe, the flow of force which on the corpuscle is equal to the product of Planck's constant to the speed of light.

New Cartesian Physic has great potential for understanding the world. To show it, I ventured to give "materialistic explanations of the paranormal and supernatural" is the title of my essay.

Visit my essay, you will find there the New Cartesian Physic and make a short entry: "I believe that space is a matter" I will answer you in return. Can put me 1.

Sincerely,

Dizhechko Boris

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.