And my reply:Immanuel Can wrote:Oh hey, lots and lots of ways...
In almost anything non-material, it immediately becomes reductional, tongue-tied and impotent to investigate beyond the material itself. (For those naive souls who cling to the belief that there is nothing but "materials" within the realm of the Real anyway, this doesn't seem a problem; but for most of us, at least those of us who have common sense, we cannot help but realize that Materialism gratuitously excludes huge and important areas of human existence and inquiry.)
Materialism is not only impotent to describe "consciousness," but "selfhood," "human dignity," "rights," "values," "morality," "justice," "meaning," "purpose," "concepts," "experience" and so on. For each of these items I have listed, Materialism is reduced to what you might call "nothing-buttery": as in, "Morals are nothing but phenomena," or "Consciousness is nothing but brain tissue in action," and so on. This is intellectually stultifying. And not only do I think so, but on the other side, staunch atheist Thomas Nagel has come out clearly in favour of this view in his latest book, titled "Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False." For any honest atheist, I would recommend this small but potent book for a read.
But even a little common sense helps us to recognize Materialism's flaws. Do any of us really live as though we have no genuine "self"? Does anyone who does philosophy imagine that they are just "moving materials"? Does anyone actually live as though all morality were nothing but phenomena -- and not care even whether those phenomena favour them or hurt them, or not cry out for justice when someone else behaves immorally toward them? Of course not. And the inability of *any* Materialist *ever* to live as though his worldview were actually true is proof positive of the hypocrisy of those who even profess it.
So I say it's time to drop the delusion and move on.
Of course you are speaking of what materialists know now, which is almost nothing. One could of course make the case that it has to be explored to find out any sort of fact, and where in it fails. Abandoning before it has been fully explored would be naive at best and stupid at worst. It's not that I disagree that materialism per se can know it all, it's just the idea that it should be thrown out with the bath water, despite actually only scratching the surface.
Drop what delusion? The delusion that a subject that knows even less, dualism etc and themes there of will somehow prove more provident, without using our logical arm to find out all we can about one field that seems to have made progress, at least as far as it can with our deficiencies of knowledge? See now that strikes me as ignorant. A god of the gaps argument, and a waste of all true philosophers time. Surely if you are truly open to ideas and not your biases therein, you should let the "baby" have its bottle?
I don't think as a philosopher it is your right to question what areas of thought are right or wrong to investigate, only to question what areas there are and their honesty/veracity in and of themselves. So people saying we should ditch areas of thought leaves me cold. If we did that wouldn't it be a sort of fascism, where we decide what to think about?
I see a lot of people trying to foist their ideas on others which is fine but I don't necessarily think people should act as judge, jury and executioner for the noble truth. Any thoughts? Now I am not saying he was doing that, but it sure sounded that way from what he posted.