For the discussion of all things philosophical, especially articles in the magazine Philosophy Now.
https://forum.philosophynow.org/
Only the physical exists.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 2:41 pm The brain is conditional (subordinate to reality). Consciousness is capricious (impulsive, unpredictable). The brain doesn't explain capricious.
The brain is material and produces non-material senses. The soul is unspecified (?) and produces thoughts. It doesn't matter whether the soul is material or non-material. It does what it does no matter how it does it. But it isn't conditional to reality but it is aroused by reality.
Thoughts may have a physical substructure in the brain (I don't know) but thoughts are created by the soul.
And how does that constitute the nature of the very same proof it requires without leading to an infinite regress towards an absence of reason equivalent in the terms of physics to entropy?Walker wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 5:08 pmOnly the physical exists.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 2:41 pm The brain is conditional (subordinate to reality). Consciousness is capricious (impulsive, unpredictable). The brain doesn't explain capricious.
The brain is material and produces non-material senses. The soul is unspecified (?) and produces thoughts. It doesn't matter whether the soul is material or non-material. It does what it does no matter how it does it. But it isn't conditional to reality but it is aroused by reality.
Thoughts may have a physical substructure in the brain (I don't know) but thoughts are created by the soul.
That's not very convincing that anything other than the physical exists, or can exist.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 5:12 pmAnd how does that constitute the nature of the very same proof it requires without leading to an infinite regress towards an absence of reason equivalent in the terms of physics to entropy?Walker wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 5:08 pmOnly the physical exists.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 2:41 pm The brain is conditional (subordinate to reality). Consciousness is capricious (impulsive, unpredictable). The brain doesn't explain capricious.
The brain is material and produces non-material senses. The soul is unspecified (?) and produces thoughts. It doesn't matter whether the soul is material or non-material. It does what it does no matter how it does it. But it isn't conditional to reality but it is aroused by reality.
Thoughts may have a physical substructure in the brain (I don't know) but thoughts are created by the soul.
Show me the foundation for "reason" in matter or energy.Walker wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 5:29 pmThat's not very convincing that anything other than the physical exists, or can exist.
Rationality is the proof that only the physical exists.
If the senses can detect something, then it is physical.
Thoughts are detected by the mind sense, therefore, thoughts are physical.
That demand, which doesn't require a philosopher to make because it doesn't contain any philosophy, still doesn't convince.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 5:36 pmShow me the foundation for "reason" in matter or energy.Walker wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 5:29 pmThat's not very convincing that anything other than the physical exists, or can exist.
Rationality is the proof that only the physical exists.
If the senses can detect something, then it is physical.
Thoughts are detected by the mind sense, therefore, thoughts are physical.
Walker wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 5:40 pmThat demand, which doesn't require a philosopher to make because it doesn't contain any philosophy, still doesn't convince.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 5:36 pmShow me the foundation for "reason" in matter or energy.Walker wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 5:29 pm
That's not very convincing that anything other than the physical exists, or can exist.
Rationality is the proof that only the physical exists.
If the senses can detect something, then it is physical.
Thoughts are detected by the mind sense, therefore, thoughts are physical.
This is much more convincing, don't you think?
A thing can exit in many realms, all physical.
Thought, voice, written word and form.
Example: a building.
I think of a building, I write of the same building, I speak of the same building, and I build the same building out of bricks like a good little pig.
All are different manifestations of the same building.
All exist, therefore all are physical.
Not all physicalities are the same.
Some are invisible to human capacity sight.
For instance, air.
Do you have any philosophy to offer on the topic?
Do you have any? The point I am making is that you summate your argument as:
1) All reality is matter
2) Reason itself must be matter
3) Hence reason must be material (which you have not jumped to)
4) If reason is material, where is the evidence for it considering the question of abstraction of universal constant forms (geometry, conceptss, etc.)?
5) Reason requires the observation of constants if universal change, which matter observes, is to be a constant law as a boundary of movement.
Of course. I’ll continue philosophizing and you’ll continue asking questions under the guise of philosophy.Eodnhoj7 wrote:Do you have any?
I’ll take that as incorrect feedback, and correct your either inadvertent, or deliberately wrong summation, in which you change words:Eodnhoj7 wrote:The point I am making is that you summate your argument as:
Typical of these sorts of articles.Bartley wrote: Physicalists say all events can be explained completely by causal chains of previous physical events. This was, roughly, the scientific worldview before the discovery of quantum physics. Now we know, however, that some events at a subatomic level are affected by whether there is an observing mind.
Zombies, because they lack the true mind it seems. A zombie is a being that lacks the mind than a non-zombie has. No physicalist claims to lack what they would call a mind.Bartley wrote:If <eliminative materialism specifically I think> were true as stated, you could not be having experiences, such as the experiences you’re having now, and the perpetrators of this doctrine would have to claim themselves to be mindless zombies or automata, writing their books mindlessly.
Walker wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 6:06 pmOf course. I’ll continue philosophizing and you’ll continue asking questions under the guise of philosophy.Eodnhoj7 wrote:Do you have any?
I’ll take that as incorrect feedback, and correct your either inadvertent, or deliberately wrong summation, in which you change words:Eodnhoj7 wrote:The point I am making is that you summate your argument as:
1) All reality is matter
All that you can perceive, is physical.
Percieving "perception" by default means it is physical.
2) Reason itself must be matter
If you can manage to perceive reason, then it is physical.
Then the laws of reason are bound to change, hence this argument will eventually change.
3) Hence reason must be material (which you have not jumped to)
Reason is physical.
So number exists as a physical entity outside its symbolic context?
4) If reason is material, where is the evidence for it considering the question of abstraction of universal constant forms (geometry, conceptss, etc.)?
The evidence is that the big bad wolf can’t disturb the physicality of my brick home, or its physical manifestation as thought, despite all the invisible gusts of air he manages to blow.
But the "wolf" does do all that in the realm of thought, with these thoughts physicalized in on form another.
5) Reason requires the observation of constants if universal change, which matter observes, is to be a constant law as a boundary of movement.
Principles exist and are perceived, by you. You exist and are perceived, by you. Principles don’t change. You don’t change. This is because you are neither the thoughts, nor the body.
Principles change if principles are material.
*
Motion is also physical. To be perceived, mind must move, which is the definition of thought.
When only one thought is thought, mind does not move, mind is not, and one thought is all.
When no thoughts are thought, mind does not move, and mind is not.
Physicality is movement as change, absent of thought is merely the boundary of another thought.
Principles don't change. Like you, they are an unchanging physicality. A principle does not change into another principle, although it may get overshadowed by another principle, or become invisible to perception.
It's called "Quantum Mechanics". And QM says nothing at all. It behaves in a peculiar manner, that only philosophy can explain.Noax wrote: ↑Thu May 24, 2018 11:51 pmTypical of these sorts of articles.Bartley wrote: Physicalists say all events can be explained completely by causal chains of previous physical events. This was, roughly, the scientific worldview before the discovery of quantum physics. Now we know, however, that some events at a subatomic level are affected by whether there is an observing mind.
Quantum physics says nothing of the sort.