90
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 13:
Line 13: +
→Economics isn't materialism?
::How are race, gender and wealth superficial? A poor black female is certainly not the same as a rich white male, in my experience. Also, the quote in the quotes section does not have a name associated with it, and is linked to a website written by a man with a fundamental misunderstanding of the fundamental forces which are: gravity, the weak nuclear force, the strong nuclear force, and the electromagnetic force. Furthermore, the sentence "Materialism denies that most great intellectual breakthroughs were the result of faith in the unseen" has no associated explanation whatsoever, and probably assumes that it is true because most scientists had faith in the unseen, without realizing that that might not be the ''cause'' of the breakthrough. -JZim
::How are race, gender and wealth superficial? A poor black female is certainly not the same as a rich white male, in my experience. Also, the quote in the quotes section does not have a name associated with it, and is linked to a website written by a man with a fundamental misunderstanding of the fundamental forces which are: gravity, the weak nuclear force, the strong nuclear force, and the electromagnetic force. Furthermore, the sentence "Materialism denies that most great intellectual breakthroughs were the result of faith in the unseen" has no associated explanation whatsoever, and probably assumes that it is true because most scientists had faith in the unseen, without realizing that that might not be the ''cause'' of the breakthrough. -JZim
::: Race at least is superficial. Why do you say that the quote is written by someone with a "fundamental misunderstanding of the fundamental forces"? As for the cause of the breakthroughs, see [[Natural science#beginnings]]; it was a cause. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:58, 7 November 2008 (EST)
::: Race at least is superficial. Why do you say that the quote is written by someone with a "fundamental misunderstanding of the fundamental forces"? As for the cause of the breakthroughs, see [[Natural science#beginnings]]; it was a cause. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:58, 7 November 2008 (EST)
::::I mentioned that fundamental misunderstanding bit because the author of the article conveniently ignores the underlying principles of, say, hard drive-making. In his article he cites as a tenet of his hypothesis that a hard drive is no heavier when it is full than when it is empty, and therefore that it contains nothing in either state, and thus that information does not exist physically. In fact, hard drives are built on the principles of basic electronics, which incorporate the fundamental force called electromagnetic, in that electrons are moved through the hard drive and switching states of bistable multivibrators between 1 and 0. Electrons (actual particles with mass and energy), silicone and germanium and semiconductor junctions in general, governed by Boolean algebra is by no means outside of the physical world. The same goes for the great mini-supercomputer we call a brain. In light of this, his entire argument falls apart, because the presence of information is explained by processes well within the material realm, and the quote in the quotes section is outdated and wrong.