Materialism is logically imposible

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Materialism is logically imposible

Post by bahman »

Materialism is a system of belief which claims that everything is constituted of matter and any motion of matter can be described by laws of nature. In close form, S'=L(S), where S is the initial state, S' is final state and L is laws of nature. There is however an anomaly in this system of view so called consciousness, C, which is simply the awareness of surrounding. C is simply the expectation of what S' should be. Materialist believe that C can be derived from S by the following equation C=P(S) where P is the act of experience. There is however no reason to believe that there exist a relation between C and S' in this framework. We however always observe a fantastic correlation between what we expect to happen, C, and what happens, S'. This means that we are dealing with a logically impossible situation since C could be anything.

Your thought?
Last edited by bahman on Mon Sep 19, 2016 2:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
sthitapragya
Posts: 1105
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:55 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by sthitapragya »

bahman wrote:Materialism is a system of belief which claims that everything is constituted of matter and any motion of matter can be described by laws of nature. In close form, S'=L(S), where S is the initial state, S' is final state and L is laws of nature. There is however an anomaly in this system of view so called consciousness, C, which is simply the awareness of surrounding. C is simply the expectation of what S' should be. Materialist believe that C can be derived from S by the following equation C=P(S) where P is the act of experience. There is however no reason to believe that there exist a relation between C and S' in this framework. We however always observe a fantastic correlation between what we expect to happen, C, and what happens, S'. This means that we are dealing with a logically impossible situation since C could be anything.

Your thought?
Are you suggesting that what we expect to happen, happens? What is the fantastic correlation you are referring to?
User avatar
HexHammer
Posts: 3352
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by HexHammer »

LOL!!! ..very interesting nonsense and babble in OP! ..what kind of job does one such as you have?
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by bahman »

sthitapragya wrote: Are you suggesting that what we expect to happen, happens? What is the fantastic correlation you are referring to?
Lets think of a situation where you sit on your chair. You decide to raise your hand and pick up your cup of coffee, what you expect (C), and what happen is that you raise your hand and pick up cup of coffee, S'. That is always the case. The problem is that there is no need for C under materialism since any motion is govern by laws of nature, L. C in principal can be anything in a huge list of experiences. This means that materialism is logically impossible since what we expect, C, always onside with what we do, S'.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by bahman »

HexHammer wrote: LOL!!! ..very interesting nonsense and babble in OP! ..what kind of job does one such as you have?
Well, do you understand OP? I think not otherwise you get engage in a constrictive discussion.
sthitapragya
Posts: 1105
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:55 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by sthitapragya »

bahman wrote:
sthitapragya wrote: Are you suggesting that what we expect to happen, happens? What is the fantastic correlation you are referring to?
Lets think of a situation where you sit on your chair. You decide to raise your hand and pick up your cup of coffee, what you expect (C), and what happen is that you raise your hand and pick up cup of coffee, S'. That is always the case. The problem is that there is no need for C under materialism since any motion is govern by laws of nature, L. C in principal can be anything in a huge list of experiences. This means that materialism is logically impossible since what we expect, C, always onside with what we do, S'.
Let's think of the same situation, I raise my hand to pick up my cup of coffee. As my hand reaches the cup handle, I sneeze and push the cup over. That is not what I expected. Or after lifting the cup, I bring the cup to my lips knowing that the coffee is very hot and I need to be very careful and take a small sip or I will burn my tongue. I take a sip, turns out it wasn't small, and I burn my tongue. So how do you explain that?
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by bahman »

sthitapragya wrote: Let's think of the same situation, I raise my hand to pick up my cup of coffee.
That is what you expected and is subject of our discussion. I mean you grasp the cup of coffee.
sthitapragya wrote: As my hand reaches the cup handle, I sneeze and push the cup over. That is not what I expected. Or after lifting the cup, I bring the cup to my lips knowing that the coffee is very hot and I need to be very careful and take a small sip or I will burn my tongue. I take a sip, turns out it wasn't small, and I burn my tongue. So how do you explain that?
I think you are talking about automatic reaction in which you move your hand subconsciously before you are consciously aware of the situation. Nevertheless your second act ,S'' (push the cup away), is consistent to what you should do in such a situation using your subconscious mind. Unfortunately we don't have access to entire content of subconscious mind. Feeling pain is the only thing which comes to our conscious mind in such situation.
sthitapragya
Posts: 1105
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:55 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by sthitapragya »

bahman wrote:
sthitapragya wrote: Let's think of the same situation, I raise my hand to pick up my cup of coffee.
That is what you expected and is subject of our discussion. I mean you grasp the cup of coffee.
sthitapragya wrote: As my hand reaches the cup handle, I sneeze and push the cup over. That is not what I expected. Or after lifting the cup, I bring the cup to my lips knowing that the coffee is very hot and I need to be very careful and take a small sip or I will burn my tongue. I take a sip, turns out it wasn't small, and I burn my tongue. So how do you explain that?
I think you are talking about automatic reaction in which you move your hand subconsciously before you are consciously aware of the situation. Nevertheless your second act ,S'' (push the cup away), is consistent to what you should do in such a situation using your subconscious mind. Unfortunately we don't have access to entire content of subconscious mind. Feeling pain is the only thing which comes to our conscious mind in such situation.
I think I haven't understood the connection you are trying to make here. You said that under materialism, C is not needed as laws of motion are governed by nature. Your example does not seem to satisfactorily explain what you mean because the laws of motion are not governed by C. What C does is simply set into motion a sequence of events which are all governed by the laws of nature. How C does that is a mystery in the sense that we have no idea about the properties of thought. Whether thought occupies any space, whether it has a mass, what is its velocity if it has velocity at all, what happens to it after it is created etc. But once it is created it just triggers the brain to start a chain of events each of which is governed by the laws of nature. So I am not sure what you mean.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by bahman »

sthitapragya wrote: I think I haven't understood the connection you are trying to make here. You said that under materialism, C is not needed as laws of motion are governed by nature. Your example does not seem to satisfactorily explain what you mean because the laws of motion are not governed by C. What C does is simply set into motion a sequence of events which are all governed by the laws of nature. How C does that is a mystery in the sense that we have no idea about the properties of thought. Whether thought occupies any space, whether it has a mass, what is its velocity if it has velocity at all, what happens to it after it is created etc. But once it is created it just triggers the brain to start a chain of events each of which is governed by the laws of nature. So I am not sure what you mean.
What I mean in simple word is that any motion is governed by laws of nature. There is no need for consciousness yet we are aware of situation. The problem is that there is fantastic correlation between what is about to happen, after making a decision, and what we expect to happen. This makes materialism logically impossible when what we expect to happen can be anything.
sthitapragya
Posts: 1105
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:55 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by sthitapragya »

bahman wrote:
What I mean in simple word is that any motion is governed by laws of nature. There is no need for consciousness yet we are aware of situation. The problem is that there is fantastic correlation between what is about to happen, after making a decision, and what we expect to happen. This makes materialism logically impossible when what we expect to happen can be anything.
Every time anyone in the world reaches for a cup of coffee, they all expect the same thing to happen. For a given set of circumstances we expect the same thing to happen. So your premise that what we expect to happen can be anything is not really correct.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by bahman »

sthitapragya wrote: ...So your premise that what we expect to happen can be anything is not really correct.
Why not? The problem is that any state of affair goes to another state of affair subjected to laws of nature. There is no room left for anything to intervene including consciousness. The problem is that why what we expect to happen matches to what happen? What we expect to happen could be anything since it has noting to do with what happen.
sthitapragya
Posts: 1105
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:55 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by sthitapragya »

bahman wrote:
sthitapragya wrote: ...So your premise that what we expect to happen can be anything is not really correct.
Why not? The problem is that any state of affair goes to another state of affair subjected to laws of nature. There is no room left for anything to intervene including consciousness. The problem is that why what we expect to happen matches to what happen? What we expect to happen could be anything since it has noting to do with what happen.
Of course it does. You reach for a cup, I reach for a cup. We both expect the same thing. If I had reached for a cup of coffee while expecting to score a goal in a football match and it actually happened, then what you said would be true. The fact is that when you do anything, anyone else doing the same thing will expect what you are expecting. We do not expect anything. We expect the same thing. Even our expectations are governed by the laws of nature. If they are not, they do not happen.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3248
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by bahman »

sthitapragya wrote: Of course it does. You reach for a cup, I reach for a cup. We both expect the same thing. If I had reached for a cup of coffee while expecting to score a goal in a football match and it actually happened, then what you said would be true. The fact is that when you do anything, anyone else doing the same thing will expect what you are expecting. We do not expect anything. We expect the same thing. Even our expectations are governed by the laws of nature. If they are not, they do not happen.
The problem that you are not noticing is that what we expect to happen has not really to do anything with what happen. You can expect to fly, score a goal, etc. while your body moves based on laws of nature doing something which has nothing to do with what you expect.
sthitapragya
Posts: 1105
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:55 pm

Re: Materialism is logicall imposible

Post by sthitapragya »

bahman wrote:
sthitapragya wrote: Of course it does. You reach for a cup, I reach for a cup. We both expect the same thing. If I had reached for a cup of coffee while expecting to score a goal in a football match and it actually happened, then what you said would be true. The fact is that when you do anything, anyone else doing the same thing will expect what you are expecting. We do not expect anything. We expect the same thing. Even our expectations are governed by the laws of nature. If they are not, they do not happen.
The problem that you are not noticing is that what we expect to happen has not really to do anything with what happen. You can expect to fly, score a goal, etc. while your body moves based on laws of nature doing something which has nothing to do with what you expect.
Now I am confused. In this case aren't you promoting the case of materialism? According to you, materialism states that everything is governed by the laws of nature and not what you expect. you are agreeing with it.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Materialism is logically imposible

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

bahman wrote:Materialism is a system of belief which claims that everything is constituted of matter and any motion of matter can be described by laws of nature. In close form, S'=L(S), where S is the initial state, S' is final state and L is laws of nature. There is however an anomaly in this system of view so called consciousness, C, which is simply the awareness of surrounding. C is simply the expectation of what S' should be. Materialist believe that C can be derived from S by the following equation C=P(S) where P is the act of experience. There is however no reason to believe that there exist a relation between C and S' in this framework. We however always observe a fantastic correlation between what we expect to happen, C, and what happens, S'. This means that we are dealing with a logically impossible situation since C could be anything.

Your thought?
If you are going to claim a logical impossibility, you ought to take at least one step towards that goal.
All you have here is a broken syllogism.
Post Reply