Panpsychism Makes a Comeback; physicist denies (General)

by dhw, Sunday, January 06, 2019, 10:28 (2146 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Your problem about particles is that is the knowledge we have that the particles we know are in fixed relationships and you are proposing they were free to roam before assuming there roles in this universe. Are you referring to 'before' the Big bang? Being conscious and consciousness arise from standard molecules made from standard elements, which are the basic combinations of the 25 particles.
I suspect God did not have to fiddle with particles, but was very direct.

dhw: I thought you were a dualist and believed that consciousness arose directly from your immaterial, non-particled God. I also thought that everything in the material universe consisted of particles. My science dictionary gives two definitions of the word, and I am using this one: “A general term broadly applied to atoms, molecules, ions, or whatever is being considered; ‘entity’ is another suitable term." In your scenario, I presume your eternal God created material particles out of himself and then put them together to create the material universe. I neither believe nor disbelieve it. In the atheistic scenario I have summarized, material particles have existed forever, and have forever been doing precisely what you think your God has been doing: putting themselves together to form different material combinations. If the Big Bang did take place, it would have been an event in an eternity of events. If your God can be eternal, so can an ever changing universe. I neither believe nor disbelieve it.

DAVID: As far as particles are concerned, Hossenfelder was referring to the basic 25 particles of the standard model, nothing larger. You should have used her definition to understand my reply. I still do believe that the universe is an invention of God's mind and His consciousness fills it. Particles from the LHC have no volition but do as we tell them to do. The charges of the basic particles attract each other automatically but don't create designs. That was her point.

If we are trying to delve into the secrets of the universe, why must we confine ourselves to Hossenfelder’s definition? What is wrong with the one I offered? I know what you believe, and I am simply offering an alternative, which I find no more and no less believable than your own. And I am still surprised that as a dualist you believe that “consciousness arises from standard molecules made from standard elements, which are the basic combinations of the 25 particles”. However, that would fit in with the atheistic version of panpsychism that I have suggested.