A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Should you think about your duty, or about the consequences of your actions? Or should you concentrate on becoming a good person?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 7:41 am
Magnus Anderson wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 12:51 am Realism, in general, refers to the idea that there exist mind-independent things. A mind-independent thing is a thing that exists independently of minds
The trouble with this premise is that the term "exists" ALWAYS expresses a mind-made judgment.

It's the mind that determines what's mind-dependent and what's mind-independent.

This is a goat. Further asserting that "It exists." is an ontological/metaphysical claim. There's no such thing as mind-independent metaphysics.

Image
Say if one is 'seeing' a goat in a farm.
Is there really an absolutely mind-independent goat out there under all conditions?

Using reflective and critical thinking,
what is likely to be a permanent or persisting goal out there is a persisting existence of a goat like that of moving images from series of single images in motion.
This is sustained by the human mind.

What is more realistic [re realists' version] about that goat that is alive is, it is merely a cluster of molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in time [t] and space [l].
Therefore it is more realistic [realists' version], instead of saying there is a mind-independent goat out there, we should say, that specific bundle and cluster of molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in time t and space[l].
Does anyone deny this?

To be even more realistic [realist version], we should state,
there is bundle and cluster of molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in time t and space[l] then track the existence of every molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in its specific time t and specific location in space[l].

Why are philosophical realists so ignorant in insisting on merely 'things' [goats, etc.] exists as mind-independent when what is more realistic is to identify the specific bundle and cluster of molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in time t and space[s] then track the existence of every molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in its specific time t and specific location in space[l].

The point is when philosophical realists via an evolutionary default insist there is an independent goat out there [the macro], they are not being realistic; this is conditioned upon the human mind to prefer this simplicity [to facilitate survival] instead of the more realistic version of referencing to that specific bundle and cluster of molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in time t and space[s] and tracking the existence of every molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in its specific time t and specific location in space[l].

As such, the philosophy realist claim of mind-independent things [even within the realist FSK] is not realistic because there is the more realistic micro version which they ignore.

Now, even if philosophical realists can track the existence of every molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in its changing time t and changing location in space[l], the fact is that molecules, atoms, electrons and particles are not mind-independent things but are conditioned upon the science-physics-chemistry FSK, thus cannot be absolutely independent of the human mind [or human conditions.

In addition, there is the human conditions [mind] in interaction with "other things" but both these two things are in constant flux within a primordial soup of particles that are always interchanging particles within each other.
As such, things [of particles] in constant flux with the human conditions [mind and body] in constant flux and interchanging particles within themselves, can NEVER be independent from one another.

What is most realistic is this;
before any things is perceived, known or described, there is the prior processes of emergence and realization within the human conditions via the interaction of particles within the primordial soup in constant flux.

So, there are no things that are independent of the human conditions as claimed by philosophical realists.

The most realistic sense of reality is, things in existence cannot be absolute independent of the human conditions [mind, brain and body]; things in existence emerged and are realized within a human-based FSR, then it is perceived, known via FSK and described within the linguistic FSK.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:12 am Is there really an absolutely mind-independent goat out there under all conditions?
Hypothesis A: There's a universe in which there is.
Hypothesis B: There's a universe in which there isn't.

What empirical procedure do you propose to distinguish universe A from universe B?

https://philosophynow.org/issues/46/New ... aser_Sword
Flannel Jesus
Posts: 2561
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2022 7:09 pm

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Flannel Jesus »

If you're claiming only fully reduced things are real - eg goats aren't real, only the fundamental particles making up goats are real - then I think it's a big leap of faith to NOT make the same argument about minds. There's no scientific consensus that minds are fundamental. Perhaps, just as a "goat" is an emergent apparition built up from the more fundamental particles of reality, so may the mind be.

So if goats aren't real because they're emergent and not fundamental, minds may not be real in the exact same sense.

(It's a little bit entertaining that the conversation came to this place, because the question of emergence and reductionism was actually how I started talking to you about all this stuff, specifically in regards to the h2o conversation. This is what I thought you meant at first.)
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:14 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:12 am Is there really an absolutely mind-independent goat out there under all conditions?
Hypothesis A: There's a universe in which there is.
Hypothesis B: There's a universe in which there isn't.

What empirical procedure do you propose to distinguish universe A from universe B?

https://philosophynow.org/issues/46/New ... aser_Sword
What is a goat is empirically justified within a human-based science biological FSK.
What is a universe is empirically justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK.

The most credible existence of a Universe* is verified and justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK.
Because our Earth is within the Universe, and that the existing Earth has goats justified within human-based science biological FSK, a Universe without goats in not tenable.

  • *The universe is all of space and time[a] and their contents,[10] including planets, stars, galaxies, and all other forms of matter and energy. The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological description of the development of the universe.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:25 am
Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:14 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:12 am Is there really an absolutely mind-independent goat out there under all conditions?
Hypothesis A: There's a universe in which there is.
Hypothesis B: There's a universe in which there isn't.

What empirical procedure do you propose to distinguish universe A from universe B?

https://philosophynow.org/issues/46/New ... aser_Sword
What is a goat is empirically justified within a human-based science biological FSK.
What is a universe is empirically justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK.

The most credible existence of a Universe* is verified and justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK.
Because our Earth is within the Universe, and that the existing Earth has goats justified within human-based science biological FSK, a Universe without goats in not tenable.

  • *The universe is all of space and time[a] and their contents,[10] including planets, stars, galaxies, and all other forms of matter and energy. The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological description of the development of the universe.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe
And you didn't answer my question why?

Which universe (of all possible universes) are we in?

The one in which the goat is "mind-dependent"
OR
The one in which the goat is "mind-independent"
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:26 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:25 am
Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:14 am
Hypothesis A: There's a universe in which there is.
Hypothesis B: There's a universe in which there isn't.

What empirical procedure do you propose to distinguish universe A from universe B?

https://philosophynow.org/issues/46/New ... aser_Sword
What is a goat is empirically justified within a human-based science biological FSK.
What is a universe is empirically justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK.

The most credible existence of a Universe* is verified and justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK.
Because our Earth is within the Universe, and that the existing Earth has goats justified within human-based science biological FSK, a Universe without goats in not tenable.

  • *The universe is all of space and time[a] and their contents,[10] including planets, stars, galaxies, and all other forms of matter and energy. The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological description of the development of the universe.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe
And you didn't answer my question why?

Which universe (of all possible universes) are we in?

The one in which the goat is "mind-dependent"
OR
The one in which the goat is "mind-independent"
I don't believe in the idea of multiverse.

We are in a Universe* that is verified and justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK because that is the most credible and reliable one at present.

This "The one in which the goat is "mind-dependent" " is a non-starter for me because I do not agree with philosophical realism, i.e. mind-independence of reality.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:31 am I don't believe in the idea of multiverse.
You don't?

Then you must know exactly which universe you are in!

The one in which the goat is "mind-dependent"
OR
The one in which the goat is "mind-independent"

Go ahead and tell me.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Flannel Jesus wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:21 am If you're claiming only fully reduced things are real - eg goats aren't real, only the fundamental particles making up goats are real - then I think it's a big leap of faith to NOT make the same argument about minds. There's no scientific consensus that minds are fundamental. Perhaps, just as a "goat" is an emergent apparition built up from the more fundamental particles of reality, so may the mind be.

So if goats aren't real because they're emergent and not fundamental, minds may not be real in the exact same sense.

(It's a little bit entertaining that the conversation came to this place, because the question of emergence and reductionism was actually how I started talking to you about all this stuff, specifically in regards to the h2o conversation. This is what I thought you meant at first.)
Re goats and mind we have to discuss them in their specific contexts.
A better comparison would be between goats and brains.
Note the neurosciences are advancing deeper and deeper into the micro-structures of the brain which is facilitating more refined knowledge that will enable greater progress in the mental field.

In general I claim,
all of reality, facts, truths, knowledge and objective are conditioned upon a human-based FSK.

I did not claim FSK-ed macro goats are not real.
FSK-ed macro goats are real with a lower degree of objectivity than if we were to refer to their micro elements.

I did claim the Philosophical Realists' independent macro goats are not realistic, i.e. they are illusory.
For the philosophical realists' it would be lesser illusory if they were to refer to the 'micro-goat' in terms of particles.

FSK-ed minds are as real relative the degree of objective of the FSK.
Thus the idea of mind as verified and justified by the science-FSK would be more real than the mind that is claimed by the theists' FSK or other pseudo-science FSK.

For the philosophical realists like PH, there is no mind-independent mind because the idea if absurd.
Flannel Jesus
Posts: 2561
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2022 7:09 pm

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Flannel Jesus »

I have no idea what all of that is saying. I'm saying something quite simple: if goats are not real because they are emergent and not fundamental, perhaps minds are not real because they are emergent and not fundamental.

-or-

Perhaps things that are emergent can also be "real".
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:35 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:31 am I don't believe in the idea of multiverse.
You don't?

Then you must know exactly which universe you are in!

The one in which the goat is "mind-dependent"
OR
The one in which the goat is "mind-independent"

Go ahead and tell me.
Answer already stated above;

We are in a Universe* that is verified and justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK because that is the most credible and reliable one at present.

What is a goat is empirically justified within a human-based science biological FSK.
What is a universe is empirically justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK.

I do not prefer the term 'mind-dependent' because it can be confusing.

Therefore I am in the FSK-ed universe with an FSK-ed goat;
as such I am not in a universe in which the goat is "mind-independent".
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:51 am
Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:35 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:31 am I don't believe in the idea of multiverse.
You don't?

Then you must know exactly which universe you are in!

The one in which the goat is "mind-dependent"
OR
The one in which the goat is "mind-independent"

Go ahead and tell me.
Answer already stated above;

We are in a Universe* that is verified and justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK because that is the most credible and reliable one at present.

What is a goat is empirically justified within a human-based science biological FSK.
What is a universe is empirically justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK.

I do not prefer the term 'mind-dependent' because it can be confusing.

Therefore I am in the FSK-ed universe with an FSK-ed goat;
as such I am not in a universe in which the goat is "mind-independent".
That's a lot of words I didn't ask for.

What experiment did you perform to eliminate the other option?
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Flannel Jesus wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:50 am I have no idea what all of that is saying. I'm saying something quite simple: if goats are not real because they are emergent and not fundamental, perhaps minds are not real because they are emergent and not fundamental.

-or-

Perhaps things that are emergent can also be "real".
that is a strawman.
I find your points confusing.
'I never claim goats are not real' without qualification.

This is a hit and miss approach, hope it hit.

Regardless of the confusion, my stance is;
FSK-ed minds are real subject to the degree of objectivity of the FSK.
Thus any concept of mind from the scientific FSK is real as dealt within psychology.

The question of 'fundamental' i.e. mind-independent claimed by philosophical realists is a non-starter for me.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:55 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:51 am
Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:35 am
You don't?

Then you must know exactly which universe you are in!

The one in which the goat is "mind-dependent"
OR
The one in which the goat is "mind-independent"

Go ahead and tell me.
Answer already stated above;

We are in a Universe* that is verified and justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK because that is the most credible and reliable one at present.

What is a goat is empirically justified within a human-based science biological FSK.
What is a universe is empirically justified within a human-based science-Physics-Cosmological FSK.

I do not prefer the term 'mind-dependent' because it can be confusing.

Therefore I am in the FSK-ed universe with an FSK-ed goat;
as such I am not in a universe in which the goat is "mind-independent".
That's a lot of words I didn't ask for.

What experiment did you perform to eliminate the other option?
I am relying on the authority of
biologists from the science-biology FSK who confirm there are real goats;
and the cosmologists from the Science-Physics-Cosmological FSK whose theories of the universe [with Earth and goats therein] are credible and reliable.

If they are wrong,
then I will welcome any other more reliable sources of FSK facts.
Last edited by Veritas Aequitas on Wed May 31, 2023 10:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:59 am
Flannel Jesus wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:50 am I have no idea what all of that is saying. I'm saying something quite simple: if goats are not real because they are emergent and not fundamental, perhaps minds are not real because they are emergent and not fundamental.

-or-

Perhaps things that are emergent can also be "real".
that is a strawman.
I find your points confusing.
'I never claim goats are not real' without qualification.

This is a hit and miss approach, hope it hit.

Regardless of the confusion, my stance is;
FSK-ed minds are real subject to the degree of objectivity of the FSK.
Thus any concept of mind from the scientific FSK is real as dealt within psychology.

The question of 'fundamental' i.e. mind-independent claimed by philosophical realists is a non-starter for me.
The whole nonsense is just a philosophical quabble over the meaning of "exists".
Flannel Jesus
Posts: 2561
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2022 7:09 pm

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Flannel Jesus »

I'm responding to this stuff
Why are philosophical realists so ignorant in insisting on merely 'things' [goats, etc.] exists as mind-independent when what is more realistic is to identify the specific bundle and cluster of molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in time t and space[s] then track the existence of every molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in its specific time t and specific location in space[l].

The point is when philosophical realists via an evolutionary default insist there is an independent goat out there [the macro], they are not being realistic
If it's not realistic to refer to goats, because goats are emergent and not fundamental, then it is equally unrealistic in my view to refer to minds, because I think it's pretty likely that minds are not fundamental.
Post Reply