3
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2026
3 points (58.8% liked)
Philosophy
1851 readers
14 users here now
Discussion of philosophy
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't have anything to learn from crackpot woo. My interest in this subject is precisely to dispel the woo, because it is not only popular among Laymen like yourself, but also among academics.
@bunchberry@lemmy.world
Through discussions like this, I start to see what kind of frameworks people are operating within.
That alone makes it a valuable learning experience for me.
It doesn't matter how much you learn if you don't value reason to begin with. Even if you are aware of the fact that theories like quantum mechanics can be explained in simple realist terms, if you just want to believe in bizarre things like people's consciousness can influence the outcome of quantum mechanical experiments, just thinking about a certain outcome really hard makes it more likely, then you would end up believing that just because you want to believe it and don't want to have a materialist worldview.
@bunchberry@lemmy.world
I think you may be misunderstanding what this theory is actually saying.
It’s not about claims like “human consciousness influences quantum outcomes” or “thinking really hard about a result makes it more likely to happen.”
More fundamentally, subjectivity and consciousness are not the same thing in this framework.
Consciousness may be something that exists within humans — for example, in the brain.
But subjectivity is defined differently: it is not something located within a person, and it is not something that can be measured.
It’s a conceptual structure of a completely different kind.