Why Physicalism is Wrong

[Atla]

It's a baseless, unnecessary, and additional assumption to posit a noumenon-phenomenon duality, especially in the light of modern neuroscience and QM. Actually there isn't a single scientific evidence from any field, that would demonstrate such a duality. People like Kant were basically refuted, but philosophers still need a job.

Like I say, people who haven't bothered to read Philosophy. Monism works with Kant's critique if you like, as he wasn't positing a duality but just a critique of what Reason can say about phenomena and the metaphysical assumption of a substrate he called the Noumena or 'thing-in-itself'. Of course you could just say its all and only phenomena(my personal choice as one of the things I know without doubt) but you'd have to say what you think Neuroscience and Quantum Mechanics has said with respect to these issues before I could change my mind that, so far, no-one has come up with a credible critique of Kant's critique, jobs or not.

Not sure what you're addressing, Eastern nondualism isn't Western monism, I can't make sense of something like "it's all and only phenomena". For that I would have to split reality into noumena and phenomena first and then discard the noumena, which is a double error. Ineed I haven't read Kant but he seems to be addressing a phenomena-noumena categorization, which doesn't exist.

Yeah I haven't read much Western philosophy since it's all fundamentally defective since like Plato. Modern science has confirmed that there are no fundamental divisions, separations in reality as far as we can tell. We can even confirm it in a laboratory how the "contents of our mind" and the "world ot there" always correlate, are inseparable, are one and the same. (Which is of course not saying that how we percieve the world is accurate.)

[bahman]

Complexity of the brain is only alternative in explaining the intellect if elephant has bigger brain and is less intellectual. What other option we have in our disposal?

I suspect there is a relationship between human brain complexity and the uniqueness of human consciousness. Perhaps that relationship will one day be explained. I do not regard the observation that the human brain is more complex than other animals as that explanation.

My personal suspicion is that it is the very different nature of human consciousness that makes the complexity of the human brain necessary.

I am only explaining why I do not agree with the view that brain complexity, all on its own, explains the human mind. I'm not making an argument against it, by the way.

What you call it consciousness and I call it mind must be simple since it is immaterial. This means that intellect is due to size of brain and how neurons are structured inside brain.

[Atla]

Maybe you could explain your notion of the measurement problem to my feeble mind. I can look it up. Wiki says "the problem of how (or whether) wave function collapse occurs". It follows from the MWI thesis that it doesn't, which neatly makes it a local interpretation since it posits no real wavefunction change on measurement.

You can't just look up and understand the measurement problem by reading a few sentences on Wiki. No offense but you don't know what you're talking about, but you're quite certain about it. There are reasons why not even all the great physicists of the 20th century could quite wrap their head around it. When they say that no one fully understands it, they mean it literally.

And for example the standard MWI says nothing about why we experience "classical" states in the first place; why don't we just see superpositions everywhere. Perhaps the heart of the measurement problem is simply ignored. And later there may be some more even more subtle unsolved issues here.

But I definitely think that the MWI-type worldview is the way to go, it needs refinement. First and foremost it needs to be cleansed from the ideas of linearity and separateness, which are how the human mind normally functions but projecting them onto reality gives us the false picture (it's more like circularity and non-separateness).

[Dontaskme]

Physicalism is an assumption that solid objects exist. For example a 'bus' or a 'car' or a 'lampost' or a 'teapot' or a 'human body'

What actualises those objects into knowledge is not the knowledge itself. It's the knower of the knowledge. So the knowledge is wrong, but the knower is right. And the knower is not an object.

So Physicalism is wrong ...Right ?

.

[Belinda]

Physicalism is an assumption that solid objects exist. For example a 'bus' or a 'car' or a 'lampost' or a 'teapot' or a 'human body'

What actualises those objects into knowledge is not the knowledge itself. It's the knower of the knowledge. So the knowledge is wrong, but the knower is right. And the knower is not an object.

So Physicalism is wrong ...Right ?

.

You explained your own preference, but nobody including you can know whether physicalism is the case or not.

[RCSaunders]

Complexity of the brain is only alternative in explaining the intellect if elephant has bigger brain and is less intellectual. What other option we have in our disposal?

Perhaps the complexity of the human brain is necessary for human intellect, but I don't see how it explains it. Be careful not to assume something is true, just because you cannot think of any alternative.

Randy

[RCSaunders]

What you call it consciousness and I call it mind must be simple since it is immaterial. This means that intellect is due to size of brain and how neurons are structured inside brain.

I know that is you view, I just do not agree with it. It's not important philosophically. What is important is that consciousness and mind are not the same thing. All animals are conscious, only human beings have that unique attribute of consciousness called the mind. If you are interested, please see the article "Mind."

Randy

[bahman]

Complexity of the brain is only alternative in explaining the intellect if elephant has bigger brain and is less intellectual. What other option we have in our disposal?

Perhaps the complexity of the human brain is necessary for human intellect, but I don't see how it explains it.

I don't see it either. Perhaps we will never know how.

Be careful not to assume something is true, just because you cannot think of any alternative.

Randy

Yes, thanks for your point.

[Arising_uk]

Not sure what you're addressing, Eastern nondualism isn't Western monism, …

You'd have to say what this 'eastern nondualism' is before I'd agree.

I can't make sense of something like "it's all and only phenomena". …

Simple really, one of the things I can't doubt is that there are phenomema.

For that I would have to split reality into noumena and phenomena first and then discard the noumena, which is a double error. …

Why? There is apparently phenomena.

need I haven't read Kant but he seems to be addressing a phenomena-noumena categorization, which doesn't exist. …

Not really, what he says is what Reason can say about phenomena and if one wished to be metaphysical and assume some substance which causes them then one cannot say anything about 'it' other than one thinks there is such a thing.

Yeah I haven't read much Western philosophy since it's all fundamentally defective since like Plato. …

Really, and you base this upon your lack of reading do you? There have been many philosophers since Plato and a few before and around his time but tell me what you think this 'fundamental defect' is?

Modern science has confirmed that there are no fundamental divisions, separations in reality as far as we can tell. We can even confirm it in a laboratory how the "contents of our mind" and the "world ot there" always correlate, are inseparable, are one and the same. (Which is of course not saying that how we percieve the world is accurate.)

If how we percieve the world is not accurate how is modern science doing what you say?

[bahman]

What you call it consciousness and I call it mind must be simple since it is immaterial. This means that intellect is due to size of brain and how neurons are structured inside brain.

I know that is you view, I just do not agree with it. It's not important philosophically. What is important is that consciousness and mind are not the same thing. All animals are conscious, only human beings have that unique attribute of consciousness called the mind. If you are interested, please see the article "Mind."

Randy

I see what do you mean with mind. I however define mind (feel free to suggest another word) as essence of any being with ability to experience, decide and cause. Mind is irreducible thing hence its attributes.

[Dontaskme]

You explained your own preference, but nobody including you can know whether physicalism is the case or not.

Individually, we each know the truth of our own reality. Truth is 'Nondual Mind' knowing itself as 'Dual Mind'

Nothing physcial is aware of itself, only awareness is aware of itself, awareness cannot be what it is aware of, there is only awareness + the contents of awareness in the same moment, therefore awareness is not physical.

Your comments are false.


.

[Belinda]

You explained your own preference, but nobody including you can know whether physicalism is the case or not.

Individually, we each know the truth of our own reality. Truth is 'Nondual Mind' knowing itself as 'Dual Mind'

Nothing physcial is aware of itself, only awareness is aware of itself, awareness cannot be what it is aware of, there is only awareness + the contents of awareness in the same moment, therefore awareness is not physical.

Your comments are false.


.

Then what truth means to you is subjective truth. In that case how could you explain how DontAskMe stays alive when she relies for her very existence upon the objective truths as held by the drivers of food lorries, supermarket shelf stackers, medical doctors, and telephone engineers?

[Noax]

You can't just look up and understand the measurement problem by reading a few sentences on Wiki. No offense but you don't know what you're talking about, but you're quite certain about it. There are reasons why not even all the great physicists of the 20th century could quite wrap their head around it. When they say that no one fully understands it, they mean it literally.

They're talking about understanding the science of QM, not just articulating the measurement problem, on which I notice you've not rendered a differing description, however simplified. MWI is a metaphysical theory, not a scientific one. They don't teach it in QM courses, or if they do, it gets a brief mention since it is irrelevant to the science being taught.

And for example the standard MWI says nothing about why we experience "classical" states in the first place; why don't we just see superpositions everywhere.

You are mixing a non-MWI interpretation of what you are with a MWI interpretation of what should be experienced by that you. MWI does not predict a different experience. None of them do.

[Dontaskme]

Then what truth means to you is subjective truth. In that case how could you explain how DontAskMe stays alive when she relies for her very existence upon the objective truths as held by the drivers of food lorries, supermarket shelf stackers, medical doctors, and telephone engineers?

The Nondual Mind knows itself as and through the dream character 'Dontaskme' ..The Nondual Mind can only know itself WITHin the dream of separation. As and through the mind/brain body mechanism...the projector.

Awareness aka light, is the dreamer. What the Light does is it streams without interruption, continuous with no break always in perfect symmetry to the character, as and through the projecter (brain)....animating the dream character giving the illusion of a real character. Each character is just an image of the one light which is imageless... the characters can do nothing without the light animating them., Only the light gives them existence, there is only light, and there is nothing behind the character in the form of an identity, the identity is purely the LIGHT. Everything is LIGHT.

In the dream of separation it does appear to the mind, aka awareness that there are individual characters (objects) seemingy living separate lives, driving food lorries, filling supermarket shelves, being doctors, going to the doctors to get a check up, etc etc etc..These characters don't know anything, they can't know, for they have no separate existence apart from the light, awareness...which is the only knowing there is, so all characters are KNOWN by this one.. and that which is KNOWN cannot know anything.

The knower is the consciousness/ mind...which is not an object or an experience, no thing is experiencing the dream character, no thing is knowing the dream character. That no thing is the mind. Reality is totally mental, not physical. Physical is just a mental conceptual construct... even the mind is a concept...there is here only the onceptual dream of separation, an illusion...there is nothing outside of the dream. This understanding is the entrance into nonduality, the truth that does not want to be heard...until it does. There are no objective or subjective truths, subject and object are ONE = NO TRUTH, IS THE TRUTH.




.

[jayjacobus]

Objects are turned into light waves, light waves hit the eye, the eye turns the light waves into neural energy and the brain turns the neural energy into images. The mind has images. The images can be confirmed by touch, feel, taste, smell and measurements. The mind is here and now. The objects are there. Memories are then. If the objects are illusions, then you are an illusion or I am an illusion.

But I can certainly say that I am not an illusion and you are not an illusion and you cannot prove otherwise.

Someone can say that everything I wrote is an illusion, but there is no evidence that it is. Everything I wrote is circumstantial evidence. The illusionist has an invention without circumstantial evidence. This a supposition but a nonworking supposition.