• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

My argument against materialism

punshhh said:
This event horizon of the formless, as I have said already is a thought. A thought which can be used to ponder the imagined relation of the finite with the infinite. You should try exercising your imagination sometimes its fun;)

Oh and the Kali Thugga was another example of religion being perverted for political ends. I'm glad I didn't run into any on my travels in India!
Click to expand...

Try exercising your imagination by pondering on reality. The Schwarzschild radius of the unknowable is a thought too,I just had it. Total garbage,just like your event horizon of the formless,but it was a thought. Are you confusing your thoughts with reality?
 
punshhh said:
I didn't expect much appreciation of spiritual ideas in this thread, whatever pearls of wisdom might have passed my keyboard.
Click to expand...
Have you presented any?

I recall that when I asked you to expand on some spiritual ideas that you alluded to, you begged off by saying your books were all in storage.
 
I should add that "wisdom" is one of those words, like "genius", that people should probably not use on themselves.
 
Even if consciousness had some form of proto self existing other than the material brain, I can't reconcile that idea with how specific material neurological damage can be to consciousness, and I don't see how other people are able to.

Not only can the sense of self be wiped out from material damage, but very specific concepts can be as well. Things like faces, individual letters and words, directions, sound, sight, color, taste, the identity of familiar people and places that leads to people thinking their friends and loved ones are impostors.

Everything you know that is intimately involved with identity and self can be wiped out while leaving the rest through precise material damage.

So how can you believe there exists a non material back up or true self?

Is there some intangible real self we only get to know and see in between lives that has nothing to do with who we are now? I think this is the only way you can possibly reconcile with such an idea.
 
dafydd said:
I think that you are confusing pearls with dung balls.
Click to expand...

This was a tongue in cheek remark in response to Laca's remark that I was feeling profound in some way.

I have not wittingly cast any pearls here and if I did or attempted to come across as profound, it would only generate ridicule.

So do you think I would do that?

I am only asking and answering questions.

Does a singularity exist in the BBE Dafydd and is it infinite?
 
Robin said:
Have you presented any?

I recall that when I asked you to expand on some spiritual ideas that you alluded to, you begged off by saying your books were all in storage.
Click to expand...

No and I have no such intention. If I do it will be in the appropriate thread, this is not such a thread.
 
[off topic]
Yesterday there was, I think, one of those "The event horizon of the formless" events - my internet phone link mysteriously dropped so that I was unable to catch up on this topic. I do so enjoy reading the responses of PixyMisa, dafydd, Dancing David, Robin, HalfCentaur etc.
Carole(nextdoor)'s line was down yesterday too, and since she uses the same ISP we think it's probably a fault in the local exchange, similar to that which caused my lack of access to the internet for three weeks in Nov/Dec last year.
[/off topic]
 
Dancing David said:
When you describe them, then we can talk.

More words mean less.
Click to expand...
What is energy?
can you conceive the answer?

I use observations of nature to ponder the nature of what is inconceivable to humans.

For example it is inconceivable;

to an ameoba to breath air,
to an ant to use a mobile phone,
to my cat to fly in an airoplane,
to a man in an uncontacted Amazonian tribe that his body is made of countless spherical atoms.
to a dolphin that the ocean is on the surface of a sphere.

It is conceivable that every living thing we know would find aspects of reality which humanity is aware of inconceivable.

Why should humans be any different?
Are we in full possession of the facts?

Take a look at the "what do we know" thread.
 
Last edited:
Belz... said:
You'd have expected anybody to understand something by now. Somehow you seem to be immune to knowledge.
Click to expand...

I understand that materialism is a branch of philosophy, Wiki etc explains this. But aren't you saying that philosophy is a waste of time?

Is materialism a belief or conviction that matter is the only thing that exists and all known phenomena can be explained through an understanding of how matter interacts?

This is presumably a belief not a philosophy.

What need is there within materialism for philosophy? Just use science it provides all the answers and its verifiable too.

This is my approach and I have no argument with materialism. However, I also take a separate interest in philosophy amongst other intellectual pursuits. I value them, but I don't confuse them with a materialistic belief.
 
Robin said:
Why not?

Meaningless category as we have discussed...

Why do you hang on to this for so long if you can't tell me what you mean by it?

I don't think that either you or I know what you mean by that.

Is your assumption that consciousness is not physical? Do you have any basis for the claim or do you just use it as an axiom?

Do you think that science cannot describe the mind or consciousness?
Click to expand...

I doubt science will be able to describe the nature of a singularity any time soon. It may be able to in principle, however the problem of the laws of physics loosing their relevance in the event horizon presents a gulf between what we can understand through the laws of physics and a singularity which doesn't make any sense.

I have accepted that "what energy is" is a meaningless category within materialism. However we are discussing science here and I would expect scientists to want in principle to find out what energy is. If a scientist where to discover something new about energy by accident for example, I am sure there would be lots of experimentation into it.

My point about how energy does what energy does is a valid point. It is harking back to the question of how time, space and energy operate, producing existence, a mystery to science I presume.

I have no argument with the materialist explanation of consciousness. However rather like the previous point materialism as presented here does not concern itself with what life and being is.
 
Halfcentaur said:
Even if consciousness had some form of proto self existing other than the material brain, I can't reconcile that idea with how specific material neurological damage can be to consciousness, and I don't see how other people are able to.

Not only can the sense of self be wiped out from material damage, but very specific concepts can be as well. Things like faces, individual letters and words, directions, sound, sight, color, taste, the identity of familiar people and places that leads to people thinking their friends and loved ones are impostors.

Everything you know that is intimately involved with identity and self can be wiped out while leaving the rest through precise material damage.

So how can you believe there exists a non material back up or true self?

Is there some intangible real self we only get to know and see in between lives that has nothing to do with who we are now? I think this is the only way you can possibly reconcile with such an idea.
Click to expand...

Thankyou for such an interesting post.

I have refrained from discussing consciousness in this thread because as stated in my previous post, I have no argument with the materialist explanation of it. Apart from the position adopted by some that the materialist position is the whole truth and to consider that there is anything else is ridiculous or nonsense.

My position is that there may be aspects of life and consciousness which are at this time unknown to science.

My reference to true self relates to spiritual exercise and is usually applicable only when the assumption of the existence of a "God" is accepted.

However my position is that this exercise is a valid and usefull exercise like yoga, jogging or meditation for example, even if said God doesn't exist (along with heaven or nirvarna).

To address your point, I appreciate how it is medically known how such brain injury effects consciousness. The way I see it is rather like a radio, you are yourself when you are receiving a signal and you can hear the music. However if the tuner does not work or a transistor is broken you don't hear music, or the signal is not being received. In this case you would not be yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom