Quote from: bl4kjaguar on May 04, 2015, 04:29:08 PM

Quote from: the joint on April 27, 2015, 03:29:50 PM

Finally, to demonstrate just how necessary philosophy is, keep in mind that science is wholly incapable of exploring, verifying, or concluding upon its own assumptions. The assumption of a Positivistic Universe is fundamentally required for scientific exploration, and yet 1) there is not a shred of evidence that such a Universe exists, and 2) the assumption itself is empirically unfalsifiable.

But if the assumption is empirically unfalsifiable (i.e. It's unscientific), why does science permit its use? The answer is simple: science yields to Philosophy to justify the Positivistic Universe assumption by deferring to the rules and limitations of sound inference via inductive reasoning.

Again, philosophical explanations > empirical explanations 100% of the time.

One product of the Positivistic Universe is the Computational Theory of the Mind (CTM) in which the mind was reduced to being the byproduct of a highly sophisticated, biological computerthe brain.

Irreducible Mind skillfully argues that CTM is empirically false and provides detailed documentation of what CTM cannot explain. For example, CTM never addresses how consciousness could arise from the brain, and anomalous experiences suggest otherwise. CTM cant even account for some of our everyday experiences, such as volition, or free will. CTM is a theory that reflects its origins rather than the richness of human experience.

http://www.noetic.org/library/book-reviews/irreducible-mind/

Yes. The problem with CTM is that it ignores the effect of perception on the brain as it is defined. That is, it ignores that the theory itself emerges from the product of the thing it tries to explain in the first place.