What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Apiatan16
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2021 1:11 pm

What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by Apiatan16 »

I think metaphysical physicalism is a coherent and solid position. I get my understanding of physicalism from what i can read on Quine on internet,i don't think he was himself interested by metaphysics. I just want to defend physicalism as a valid metaphysical position, and if i can't, so be it.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by Advocate »

It'd be helpful for you to outline your understanding of Quine's understanding so there's more to get a handle on.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by bahman »

Apiatan16 wrote: Sun Aug 22, 2021 3:06 pm I think metaphysical physicalism is a coherent and solid position. I get my understanding of physicalism from what i can read on Quine on internet,i don't think he was himself interested by metaphysics. I just want to defend physicalism as a valid metaphysical position, and if i can't, so be it.
What is wrong with physicalism? There are anomalies like consciousness in this system of belief.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by Advocate »

[quote=bahman post_id=526618 time=1631373091 user_id=12593]
What is wrong with physicalism? There are anomalies like consciousness in this system of belief.
[/quote]

Nonsense. That we don't have an exhaustive taxonomy of causality yet is no evidence that the as-of-yet-unexplained is an anomaly to physicalism. There's also no direct link to love or my favorite color; that doesn't mean they aren't primarily physical phenomenon.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8533
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by Sculptor »

bahman wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:11 pm
Apiatan16 wrote: Sun Aug 22, 2021 3:06 pm I think metaphysical physicalism is a coherent and solid position. I get my understanding of physicalism from what i can read on Quine on internet,i don't think he was himself interested by metaphysics. I just want to defend physicalism as a valid metaphysical position, and if i can't, so be it.
What is wrong with physicalism? There are anomalies like consciousness in this system of belief.
It's not an anomaly in any sense.
It simply proposes that matter and energy are the sources of consciousness. And you can prove that with demonstrations.

If you have something better, such as "magic", then you are free to try to convince us of that.

For it to be an anomaly you would have to show that consciousness can be derived without physicalism.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by bahman »

Advocate wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 6:13 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:11 pm What is wrong with physicalism? There are anomalies like consciousness in this system of belief.
Nonsense. That we don't have an exhaustive taxonomy of causality yet is no evidence that the as-of-yet-unexplained is an anomaly to physicalism. There's also no direct link to love or my favorite color; that doesn't mean they aren't primarily physical phenomenon.
It is an anomally unless you claim that you have a solution to the hard problem of consciousness. How something that its part are not conscious could be possibly conscious.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by bahman »

Sculptor wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 7:47 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:11 pm
Apiatan16 wrote: Sun Aug 22, 2021 3:06 pm I think metaphysical physicalism is a coherent and solid position. I get my understanding of physicalism from what i can read on Quine on internet,i don't think he was himself interested by metaphysics. I just want to defend physicalism as a valid metaphysical position, and if i can't, so be it.
What is wrong with physicalism? There are anomalies like consciousness in this system of belief.
It's not an anomaly in any sense.
It simply proposes that matter and energy are the sources of consciousness. And you can prove that with demonstrations.

If you have something better, such as "magic", then you are free to try to convince us of that.

For it to be an anomaly you would have to show that consciousness can be derived without physicalism.
How do you resolve the hard problem of consciousness?
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8533
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by Sculptor »

bahman wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:59 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 7:47 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 4:11 pm
What is wrong with physicalism? There are anomalies like consciousness in this system of belief.
It's not an anomaly in any sense.
It simply proposes that matter and energy are the sources of consciousness. And you can prove that with demonstrations.

If you have something better, such as "magic", then you are free to try to convince us of that.

For it to be an anomaly you would have to show that consciousness can be derived without physicalism.
How do you resolve the hard problem of consciousness?
What problem?
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by bahman »

Sculptor wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 3:50 pm
bahman wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:59 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 7:47 pm

It's not an anomaly in any sense.
It simply proposes that matter and energy are the sources of consciousness. And you can prove that with demonstrations.

If you have something better, such as "magic", then you are free to try to convince us of that.

For it to be an anomaly you would have to show that consciousness can be derived without physicalism.
How do you resolve the hard problem of consciousness?
What problem?
The problem that how the brain can be conscious when its parts are not.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8533
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by Sculptor »

bahman wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:19 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 3:50 pm
bahman wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:59 pm
How do you resolve the hard problem of consciousness?
What problem?
The problem that how the brain can be conscious when its parts are not.
There is no problem since we know that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts in countless examples you seem to dull to recognise.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by bahman »

Sculptor wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:57 pm
bahman wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:19 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 3:50 pm
What problem?
The problem that how the brain can be conscious when its parts are not.
There is no problem since we know that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts in countless examples you seem to dull to recognise.
The whole cannot be greater than the sum of its part when the property of the whole is a function of properties of parts.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by Advocate »

[quote=bahman post_id=526788 time=1631528420 user_id=12593]
[quote=Sculptor post_id=526740 time=1631462278 user_id=17400]
[quote=bahman post_id=526735 time=1631459950 user_id=12593]

The problem that how the brain can be conscious when its parts are not.
[/quote]

There is no problem since we know that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts in countless examples you seem to dull to recognise.
[/quote]
The whole cannot be greater than the sum of its part when the property of the whole is a function of properties of parts.
[/quote]

Mind is a metaphor for the patterns in the brain. Consciousness is a sub-set of that. As is god.

When we decide how to define consciousness, we'll know how to science on it. The solution is semantic - what do we want to do with the word?

The answer (framework of understanding, as opposed to solution - custom action plan) is in Neuroscience. When we understand the How, we'll be able to find the right metaphor to describe it, and decide what we want to do about it.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by RCSaunders »

Advocate wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 2:13 pm Mind is a metaphor for the patterns in the brain.
How odd. What patterns, exactly, are conscious perceiving and thinking? Are they physical patterns, chemical patterns, electrical patterns, behavioral patterns, or some other kind of patterns? What does that even mean?
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by RCSaunders »

Sculptor wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:57 pm
bahman wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:19 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2021 3:50 pm
What problem?
The problem that how the brain can be conscious when its parts are not.
There is no problem since we know that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts in countless examples you seem to dull to recognise.
"We," do? I'm not certain what those who say that mean, but if it means something made up of components weighing 5 lbs, 3 lbs, and 2 lbs, can be a whole greater than 10 lbs, it's just plain wrong. Every other explanation I've seen is some form of equivocation. Like describing something made of physical parts (an automobile or computer for example) then identifying something like the behavior of that thing as another thing, as though the fact the an automobile provides transportation were a thing that, "emerged," from its parts.

The two obvious things wrong with that idea is that, 1. "transportation," is not a thing but an attribute and 2. an automobile is not a mere sum of its parts, but a specific arrangement of parts. Just dumping all of an automobile's parts in a pile would be the sum of those parts, but not an automobile.

I'm not saying there cannot be a case of something being greater than the sum of its parts, only that I have never been provided a single example. Maybe you have one.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: What's wrong with physicalism ? And a possible defence of it

Post by Advocate »

[quote=RCSaunders post_id=526811 time=1631544049 user_id=16196]
[quote=Advocate post_id=526808 time=1631538837 user_id=15238]
Mind is a metaphor for the patterns in the brain.[/quote]
How odd. What patterns, exactly, are conscious perceiving and thinking? Are they physical patterns, chemical patterns, electrical patterns, behavioral patterns, or some other kind of patterns? What does that even mean?
[/quote]

The higher-order ones. It's a metaphor. It doesn't get specific boundaries.
Post Reply