Early neuroscientists and dualism

I don't think it is a matter of political correctness? I think dualism suffers from the idea that two distinct substances interact**

That seems to be another way of saying that mind must be confined to matter because matter (i.e. stuff from physics textbooks) can't by definition interact with anything else!

It expresses the same sentiment as "I am a scientist, so obviously I don't believe in any New Age stuff, and if you want to become a scientist/remain one, you shouldn't either."

I have pointed out before that Panpsyshicm suffers a similar problem in that QM requires all fundamental particles of a given type to be identical - so if they are conscious, that consciousness can't build up.

To me, that means Panpsychism and Dualism are killed off using a similar argument.

Panpsychism is a bit vague, and so is better tolerated in academia, whereas Dualism is easier to understand, and so is disliked more intensely within academia! Idealism is tolerated even more because it is even harder to apply to real problems.

Science is incredibly schizophrenic in that in most matters science is happy to work with concepts that are only approximately true. For example, gravity is usually treated as Newtonian Gravity because GR is algebraically very complex - indeed, sometimes calculations are done using little g where the variations of the gravitational field are not important.

By now I am sufficiently cynical to suspect that Dualism was targeted precisely because it is easy to understand!

David

That seems to be another way of saying that mind must be confined to matter because matter (i.e. stuff from physics textbooks) can't by definition interact with anything else!

It expresses the same sentiment as "I am a scientist, so obviously I don't believe in any New Age stuff, and if you want to become a scientist/remain one, you shouldn't either."

I have pointed out before that Panpsyshicm suffers a similar problem in that QM requires all fundamental particles of a given type to be identical - so if they are conscious, that consciousness can't build up.

To me, that means Panpsychism and Dualism are killed off using a similar argument.

Panpsychism is a bit vague, and so is better tolerated in academia, whereas Dualism is easier to understand, and so is disliked more intensely within academia! Idealism is tolerated even more because it is even harder to apply to real problems.

Science is incredibly schizophrenic in that in most matters science is happy to work with concepts that are only approximately true. For example, gravity is usually treated as Newtonian Gravity because GR is algebraically very complex - indeed, sometimes calculations are done using little g where the variations of the gravitational field are not important.

By now I am sufficiently cynical to suspect that Dualism was targeted precisely because it is easy to understand!

David

Well that comment is from around five years ago heh.

It’s likely true that STEM academia rejected Dualism [partly] because of how it is in support of Survival.

Given Levin’s work and his support for Dualism there might be a sea change if his experimental work proves to fulfill its promise in offering a novel cancer treatment.