Kharakov
Quantum Hot Dog
Means approximately the same thing as "as long as you don't shift perspective from particles to systems, you will be lost" to me.Hey. In the following exchange, you confused Ryan by your incorrect usage of English (although I readily understood your point, some have problems understanding things when you do not use proper English).
'Doesn't' should be 'don't' in the sentence.No. That would be the exact opposite of what I try to communicate: you wont get anywhere until you shift perspective from particles to systems.I am not trying to be picky, but the sentence only makes sense without "doesnt".To ryan:
As long as you doesnt shift perspective from particles to systems, you will be lost.
Does the sentence get your point across without "doesnt"?
No, Juma's point would not be made by using "don't". Juma rephrased it to mean, "Until you shift perspective from particles to systems, you will be lost.
Well, according to Juma, you can't get anywhere with perceiving your hand as fingers. Maybe we can't get anywhere by looking at the whole as its parts, but that does not seem compatible with physicalism. I actually believe the opposite; I think that it is necessary to understand the parts in order to understand the whole.
Physicalism encompasses wholes and parts, AFAIK, and the various perspectives on the systems involving them. Brain, neurons, mind, body, etc. All being able to be viewed from varying perspectives, some of which don't completely correspond to reality (well, all of which don't completely correspond to reality- our point particle type existence is a bit.... wanting).