Holy shit, this is fantastic, much respect to Wright and Frank for traversing this very difficult terrain in such an understandable and educational, and scientific! manner. There must be a more righteous universe where this has more views!

I admire Robert Wright. He is one of the few truly honest intellectuals who openly admits when he doesn't understand something. Would that other "intellectuals" followed his example...

@colinshawhan8590

6 жыл бұрын

I am truly a fan. He's not the smartest but he would be the first to admit it.

Fascinating discussion that ranges from quantum physics and materialism to consciousness and subjectivity, with a captivating balance of the science with the philosophical methods and tools. Both Wright and Frank are very smart in several dimensions AND they are both able to speak in laymen's terms. One great nugget was Frank's comment that "we don't really have an adequate language [in the west's intellectual tradition] for describing subjectivity, which is really the fundamental question." [Starts at 35:09] Thank you Robert Wright for your awesome interviews, and I plan to re-visit this one!

“Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real” - Niels Bohr For lapsed materialists: brianwhitworth.com/BW-VRT1.pdf

excellent conversation!

Another great discussion.....

I know nothing about quantum physics, however, the collapse of the wave function when it is measured, just means to me that we have gone from probabilities to "ending the race" in the sense of a horse race. The first horse crossing the finish line is analogous to measuring where the electron is.

ROBERT WRIGHT? Love your interviews. Please contact Robert Lanza and see if you can arrange a conversation between you two. He might help you 'connect the dots' in regards to your chats with Adam Frank and David Wallace. ; )

Anyone know how to spell this "Chris Fooks" guy he mentions re Quantum Bayesianism towards the end?

Awesome dialogue

I know nothing about quantum physics, but I am super curious and interested in learning more. In listening to this exchange, how much of our understanding at the quantum level is like a blind man trying to understand an elephant by using the tip of one finger? It feels like there is a lot to see, but our ability to see it is extremely limited, at least right now? Is that an accurate way of summarizing our current understanding? That is, we're currently markedly limited by what we can actually see/measure?

Well, whatever the case may be, I hope the experience of spacetime and events is deterministic, if only for the absurd realization that this discussion and all others on the topic are predetermined. /s

Smile Bob!

Please educate Sam Harris in this stuff, that there is something happen without a cause ;-D He didn't understand this at all esp. 32:45 first semester physic ....

What in the universe owes these two guys anything understandable or concrete? The consciousness of the measurer is not the issue. It's the measuring.

Don't use the word "measurement". Also Roger Penrose idea is gaining some experimental heft

The conversation would be much richer if Wright would stop interrupting his guest and stop talking over him. If Wright wants a monologue audience, fine. But please, if you're "interviewing," let the guest speak freely, without interruption.

You will know if the cat is alive because of the noise it makes, noise is non material

@simonfoster4350

6 жыл бұрын

And in any case, that would count as an observation

@simonfoster4350

6 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the explanation!