Phillip Goff

But yeah, I mean, one key move of Galileo was his big declaration in 1623 that from now on, science was going to be purely mathematical, was going to have a purely quantitative language to describe reality. And that was a radically new step, you know, that had never been done before. But he had to do a lot of philosophical work to make sense of that.

So one big problem for Galileo is when you look at the world around you, using your conscious experience, it seems to be filled with qualities, colors, sounds, smells, tastes. And Galileo thought, I think rightly, that it's hard to see how you can capture those kinds of qualities in the purely quantitative language of mathematics.

So one big problem for Galileo is when you look at the world around you, using your conscious experience, it seems to be filled with qualities, colors, sounds, smells, tastes. And Galileo thought, I think rightly, that it's hard to see how you can capture those kinds of qualities in the purely quantitative language of mathematics.

So one big problem for Galileo is when you look at the world around you, using your conscious experience, it seems to be filled with qualities, colors, sounds, smells, tastes. And Galileo thought, I think rightly, that it's hard to see how you can capture those kinds of qualities in the purely quantitative language of mathematics.

An equation can't capture that deep red you experience as you watch a setting sun, for example. So this was the big puzzle for Galileo and perhaps what had stopped people before having a purely mathematical science. So his solution was, well, if we want science to be mathematical, we need to take consciousness and its qualities

An equation can't capture that deep red you experience as you watch a setting sun, for example. So this was the big puzzle for Galileo and perhaps what had stopped people before having a purely mathematical science. So his solution was, well, if we want science to be mathematical, we need to take consciousness and its qualities

An equation can't capture that deep red you experience as you watch a setting sun, for example. So this was the big puzzle for Galileo and perhaps what had stopped people before having a purely mathematical science. So his solution was, well, if we want science to be mathematical, we need to take consciousness and its qualities

out of the domain of science right there in the soul consciousness with all its funny sounds and smells and colors and they're all they're all in the soul and after we've stripped the world of its qualities its colors and its smells everything else we capture in mathematics so that was this that was the start of mathematical physics so that you know that was a good move that's produced incredible technology and incredible scientific progress

out of the domain of science right there in the soul consciousness with all its funny sounds and smells and colors and they're all they're all in the soul and after we've stripped the world of its qualities its colors and its smells everything else we capture in mathematics so that was this that was the start of mathematical physics so that you know that was a good move that's produced incredible technology and incredible scientific progress

out of the domain of science right there in the soul consciousness with all its funny sounds and smells and colors and they're all they're all in the soul and after we've stripped the world of its qualities its colors and its smells everything else we capture in mathematics so that was this that was the start of mathematical physics so that you know that was a good move that's produced incredible technology and incredible scientific progress

what we've maybe forgotten. in our enthusiasm with how well it's gone, is that it was aimed at a very limited focus, one that took consciousness outside of the domain of science. And so if we want to bring consciousness fully back into the scientific story, maybe we need to rethink those philosophical assumptions that Galileo bequeathed to us.

what we've maybe forgotten. in our enthusiasm with how well it's gone, is that it was aimed at a very limited focus, one that took consciousness outside of the domain of science. And so if we want to bring consciousness fully back into the scientific story, maybe we need to rethink those philosophical assumptions that Galileo bequeathed to us.

what we've maybe forgotten. in our enthusiasm with how well it's gone, is that it was aimed at a very limited focus, one that took consciousness outside of the domain of science. And so if we want to bring consciousness fully back into the scientific story, maybe we need to rethink those philosophical assumptions that Galileo bequeathed to us.

Maybe we need to find a way to bring back together what Galileo separated.

Maybe we need to find a way to bring back together what Galileo separated.

Maybe we need to find a way to bring back together what Galileo separated.

Yeah, I think there's often an almost naive assumption that we can just read off the nature of ultimate reality from experimental data. And I think if philosophy has taught us anything, it's not so simple. That can't really be done. You know, I mean, it depends what question you're trying to ask, right? If you've got a very focused question, like, I don't know, does smoking cause cancer, right?

Yeah, I think there's often an almost naive assumption that we can just read off the nature of ultimate reality from experimental data. And I think if philosophy has taught us anything, it's not so simple. That can't really be done. You know, I mean, it depends what question you're trying to ask, right? If you've got a very focused question, like, I don't know, does smoking cause cancer, right?

Yeah, I think there's often an almost naive assumption that we can just read off the nature of ultimate reality from experimental data. And I think if philosophy has taught us anything, it's not so simple. That can't really be done. You know, I mean, it depends what question you're trying to ask, right? If you've got a very focused question, like, I don't know, does smoking cause cancer, right?

Okay, then you can do the experiments or make the observations. You can get an answer, at least with a high probability. But when we're asking these very big questions about the ultimate nature of reality, is mind or matter fundamental? I don't know. Does God exist? Whatever. I don't think there is no experiment you can do to just settle that. But you know, don't get me wrong.