I already answered that. They are simply wrong. The behavior of matter is either arbitrary or it is based on the laws of physics. There is no other option. Which option do you pick?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 12:57 pmAnd you're still ignoring that there are physicalists (or materialists) who are not realists on physical laws. In other words, who do NOT say that matter "obeys the laws of physics." The "laws of physics" are simply a way of thinking/talking about regularities that are observed in particulars.bahman wrote: ↑Thu May 13, 2021 10:19 pm What do you mean? I mean withing materialism which is a sort of monism, matter acts according to laws of physics rather than any other thing like laws of psychology. Consciousness is irrelevant. It is the byproduct of the matter process which obeys the laws of physics.
An argument against materialism
Re: An argument against materialism
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: An argument against materialism
Again, you believe that the laws of physics are something that humans do, no?bahman wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 7:54 pmI already answered that. They are simply wrong. The behavior of matter is either arbitrary or it is based on the laws of physics. There is no other option. Which option do you pick?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 12:57 pmAnd you're still ignoring that there are physicalists (or materialists) who are not realists on physical laws. In other words, who do NOT say that matter "obeys the laws of physics." The "laws of physics" are simply a way of thinking/talking about regularities that are observed in particulars.bahman wrote: ↑Thu May 13, 2021 10:19 pm What do you mean? I mean withing materialism which is a sort of monism, matter acts according to laws of physics rather than any other thing like laws of psychology. Consciousness is irrelevant. It is the byproduct of the matter process which obeys the laws of physics.
Re: An argument against materialism
Of course not. The matter as I mentioned behaves according to the laws of physics. We understand them since there is regularity in the behavior of the matter. This behavior can be formulated.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 9:13 pmAgain, you believe that the laws of physics are something that humans do, no?bahman wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 7:54 pmI already answered that. They are simply wrong. The behavior of matter is either arbitrary or it is based on the laws of physics. There is no other option. Which option do you pick?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 12:57 pm
And you're still ignoring that there are physicalists (or materialists) who are not realists on physical laws. In other words, who do NOT say that matter "obeys the laws of physics." The "laws of physics" are simply a way of thinking/talking about regularities that are observed in particulars.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: An argument against materialism
Then you didn't understand my earlier comments/questions, which is why communication in this medium is so difficult. People don't understand, but instead of saying that they don't understand and asking for clarification, they just plow ahead.bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 12:11 amOf course not. The matter as I mentioned behaves according to the laws of physics. We understand them since there is regularity in the behavior of the matter. This behavior can be formulated.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 9:13 pmAgain, you believe that the laws of physics are something that humans do, no?
If you believe that there ARE physical laws, BUT you also believe that physical laws are NOT simply a way that we think/something that we do, then by definition, you're a realist on physical laws. So the question, again, is just what sort of existent (they have to exist if there ARE physical laws somehow) you believe physical laws to be.
- Conde Lucanor
- Posts: 846
- Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:59 am
Re: An argument against materialism
Then you have no idea of what materialism is. In which way conscious processes are excluded from materialism?
Your extreme reductionism is unacceptable. The brain is a complex organ of a multicellular biological organism, comprised of multiple systems that operate autonomously in response to environmental stimuli. Biological systems have their own dynamics and display emergent properties that follow biochemical principles. All of this consistent with laws of physics. Consciousness, mind, is what a brain does.
No, they are not. You don't know what you're talking about. Hydrogen is a highly flammable gas.
Re: An argument against materialism
I already elaborated on what I mean with TO BE physical. The matter has properties. It behaves according to the laws of physics. The laws of physics are due to the fact that matter has properties.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 12:33 amThen you didn't understand my earlier comments/questions, which is why communication in this medium is so difficult. People don't understand, but instead of saying that they don't understand and asking for clarification, they just plow ahead.bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 12:11 amOf course not. The matter as I mentioned behaves according to the laws of physics. We understand them since there is regularity in the behavior of the matter. This behavior can be formulated.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 9:13 pm
Again, you believe that the laws of physics are something that humans do, no?
If you believe that there ARE physical laws,
The laws of physics are for the insentient matter. It is not about what we/humans do or think.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 9:13 pm BUT you also believe that physical laws are NOT simply a way that we think/something that we do,
I think that matter only behaves according to physical laws.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 9:13 pm then by definition, you're a realist on physical laws.
Physical laws do not exist as an apple exists. Matter behaves. It is behavior is regular. This means that its behavior can be formulated and be explained in terms of the laws of physics.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Fri May 14, 2021 9:13 pm So the question, again, is just what sort of existent (they have to exist if there ARE physical laws somehow) you believe physical laws to be.
Re: An argument against materialism
I have.
Matter, including the electrons in your brain, behaves according to the laws of physics. Do you think that the conscious process can affect the motion of electrons in your brain? Can you move the electrons in your brain?Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 3:39 am In which way conscious processes are excluded from materialism?
Are you saying that the brain does not behave according to the laws of physics?Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 3:39 amYour extreme reductionism is unacceptable. The brain is a complex organ of a multicellular biological organism, comprised of multiple systems that operate autonomously in response to environmental stimuli. Biological systems have their own dynamics and display emergent properties that follow biochemical principles. All of this consistent with laws of physics. Consciousness, mind, is what a brain does.
I know what I am talking about. I am a physicist and think through this to the end. It is well known that all properties of water, which are physical properties, are a function of the physical properties of hydrogen and oxygen. There is no emergence (strong emergence) there. By physical properties, I don't mean the macroscopic phenomenon of fire. By physical properties, I mean mass, charge, spin. In fact, you can even calculate the physical properties of water in terms of oxygen and hydrogen properties. Peoples study the behavior of even DNA and bigger entity these days based on the laws of physics.Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 3:39 amNo, they are not. You don't know what you're talking about. Hydrogen is a highly flammable gas.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: An argument against materialism
Look. First, you either believe that there are laws of physics or you believe that there are not laws of physics.
Which do you believe?
Re: An argument against materialism
What do you mean with are in "...there are laws of physics..."?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 8:52 pmLook. First, you either believe that there are laws of physics or you believe that there are not laws of physics.
Which do you believe?
- Conde Lucanor
- Posts: 846
- Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:59 am
Re: An argument against materialism
Well, maybe you have an idea, but it is the completely wrong idea.
How does this mean the exclusion of consciousness from materialism? Organic matter is emergent from non-organic matter and therefore ultimately obeys the laws of physics, but one cannot explain how an organism behaves without getting into the autonomous processes of biology, which require other set of natural laws not reducible to laws of physics. That's what emergentism is, while you're peddling reductionism.bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 8:36 pmMatter, including the electrons in your brain, behaves according to the laws of physics. Do you think that the conscious process can affect the motion of electrons in your brain? Can you move the electrons in your brain?Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 3:39 am In which way conscious processes are excluded from materialism?
No, I'm saying reductionism is false.
I have to seriously doubt that you are a physicist. When one refers to physical properties, they are not what you say they are:bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 8:36 pm I know what I am talking about. I am a physicist and think through this to the end. It is well known that all properties of water, which are physical properties, are a function of the physical properties of hydrogen and oxygen. There is no emergence (strong emergence) there. By physical properties, I don't mean the macroscopic phenomenon of fire. By physical properties, I mean mass, charge, spin. In fact, you can even calculate the physical properties of water in terms of oxygen and hydrogen properties. Peoples study the behavior of even DNA and bigger entity these days based on the laws of physics.
Examples of Physical Properties
Physical Property
Definition of Physical Property
A physical property is a characteristic of matter that can be observed and measured without changing the chemical identity of the sample. The measurement of a physical property can change the arrangement of matter in a sample but not the structure of its molecules. In other words, a physical property might involve a physical change but not a chemical change. If a chemical change or reaction occurs, the observed characteristics are chemical properties.
Re: An argument against materialism
It does not exclude consciousness from materialism (materialists however owe an explanation for the hard problem of consciousness). If you cannot control or affect the electrons of your brain then your consciousness phenomena do not have anything to do with what you think you do since what you do is decided, according to the laws of physics, so conscious phenomena are therefore irrelevant. The question is why something which irrelevant can correspond to what is happening in reality then becomes relevant.Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 10:24 pmWell, maybe you have an idea, but it is the completely wrong idea.How does this mean the exclusion of consciousness from materialism?bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 8:36 pmMatter, including the electrons in your brain, behaves according to the laws of physics. Do you think that the conscious process can affect the motion of electrons in your brain? Can you move the electrons in your brain?Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 3:39 am In which way conscious processes are excluded from materialism?
Organic matter is emergent from non-organic matter and therefore ultimately obeys the laws of physics, but one cannot explain how an organism behaves without getting into the autonomous processes of biology, which require other set of natural laws not reducible to laws of physics. That's what emergentism is, while you're peddling reductionism.
So you can do something against the laws of physics? You cannot even affect the electrons of your brain therefore your consciousness is irrelevant.
Do you think that the properties of water are not reducible to the physical properties of hydrogen and oxcygen?Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 3:39 amI have to seriously doubt that you are a physicist. When one refers to physical properties, they are not what you say they are:bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 8:36 pm I know what I am talking about. I am a physicist and think through this to the end. It is well known that all properties of water, which are physical properties, are a function of the physical properties of hydrogen and oxygen. There is no emergence (strong emergence) there. By physical properties, I don't mean the macroscopic phenomenon of fire. By physical properties, I mean mass, charge, spin. In fact, you can even calculate the physical properties of water in terms of oxygen and hydrogen properties. Peoples study the behavior of even DNA and bigger entity these days based on the laws of physics.
Examples of Physical Properties
Physical Property
Definition of Physical Property
A physical property is a characteristic of matter that can be observed and measured without changing the chemical identity of the sample. The measurement of a physical property can change the arrangement of matter in a sample but not the structure of its molecules. In other words, a physical property might involve a physical change but not a chemical change. If a chemical change or reaction occurs, the observed characteristics are chemical properties.
- Conde Lucanor
- Posts: 846
- Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:59 am
Re: An argument against materialism
No, that's a pseudo-problem and materialists don't owe more explanations other than what is already being studied in neuroscience, which already only works under materialistic assumptions. But even if materialists owed an explanation, and they produced such thing with the rigorous scientific approach expected, the non-materialists would have to rely on that explanation, too, because they have nothing else. There is no "immaterial" science.
It is common, standard knowledge, that any physical alteration to brain tissue, will have an effect on mental functions. So, brain matter is quite relevant to conscious phenomena.bahman wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 12:21 am If you cannot control or affect the electrons of your brain then your consciousness phenomena do not have anything to do with what you think you do since what you do is decided, according to the laws of physics, so conscious phenomena are therefore irrelevant. The question is why something which irrelevant can correspond to what is happening in reality then becomes relevant.
How about going dead and turning off all biological processes of the organism? That surely makes an impact on consciousness, since it goes dead too.
The physical properties of hydrogen gas and the physical properties of oxygen gas are definitely not the physical properties of water, just as the physical properties of sodium and the physical properties of chlorine are not the same physical properties of the salt you put in your food.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: An argument against materialism
You're unfamiliar with the English word "are" yet you're posting on a philosophy board? Seriously?bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 8:54 pmWhat do you mean with are in "...there are laws of physics..."?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 8:52 pmLook. First, you either believe that there are laws of physics or you believe that there are not laws of physics.
Which do you believe?
Re: An argument against materialism
Anyway, that is aside.Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:46 amNo, that's a pseudo-problem and materialists don't owe more explanations other than what is already being studied in neuroscience, which already only works under materialistic assumptions. But even if materialists owed an explanation, and they produced such thing with the rigorous scientific approach expected, the non-materialists would have to rely on
that explanation, too, because they have nothing else. There is no "immaterial" science.
I think you didn't understand my comment. Again, could you (conscious phenomena) possibly affect the motions of electrons in your brain?Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:46 amIt is common, standard knowledge, that any physical alteration to brain tissue, will have an effect on mental functions. So, brain matter is quite relevant to conscious phenomena.bahman wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 12:21 am If you cannot control or affect the electrons of your brain then your consciousness phenomena do not have anything to do with what you think you do since what you do is decided, according to the laws of physics, so conscious phenomena are therefore irrelevant. The question is why something which irrelevant can correspond to what is happening in reality then becomes relevant.
Again, could you affect the electrons of your brain? If yes, how?Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:46 amHow about going dead and turning off all biological processes of the organism? That surely makes an impact on consciousness, since it goes dead too.
I am talking about single water only. You are adding the consciousness and sensory system of an agent to the equation.Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:46 amThe physical properties of hydrogen gas and the physical properties of oxygen gas are definitely not the physical properties of water, just as the physical properties of sodium and the physical properties of chlorine are not the same physical properties of the salt you put in your food.
Re: An argument against materialism
I already have been through this question. I think that there are the laws of physics in which it could only be experienced abstractly and the matter behaves according to it.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 4:30 amYou're unfamiliar with the English word "are" yet you're posting on a philosophy board? Seriously?bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 8:54 pmWhat do you mean with are in "...there are laws of physics..."?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sat May 15, 2021 8:52 pm
Look. First, you either believe that there are laws of physics or you believe that there are not laws of physics.
Which do you believe?