materialism and laws of logic

[malfunktion]

I find the discussions of materialism on this board very fascinating.

Quick question: how do materialists explain the existence of abstract concepts in and of themselves? For example, are concepts themselves considered "material" in some way? How would you classify the "laws of logic" as being material?

 

[Upchurch]

I think a strict materialist would describe abstract concepts as human thoughts. Human thoughts, in turn, are composed of different combinations neurons and molecules in the brain.

Much like a picture on a computer screen. That picture isn't literally stored on the computer's hard drive, but is encoded in the bits and bytes of the hard drive.

 

[arcticpenguin]

Information.

Information does not exist unless it is embodied in some material. Thoughts, ideas, concepts, like computer programs, would not exist if they were not stored or processed in some material medium.

 

[arcticpenguin]

So if you damaged a part of somebody's brain, they might lose their memory, or some of their thinking ability.

Hey, you know, that could actually happen.

 

[malfunktion]

Wouldnt that make the laws of logic dependent on the human brain? I thought the laws of logic existed in some independent form?

So the laws dont exist apart from somebody's brain?

 

[hammegk]

So the laws dont exist apart from somebody's brain?

LOL. Welcome to the board, m.

Careful, you will have the materialists here (er, well now I think they are all naturalists) hurting themselves with their usual illogic.

 

[Upchurch]

{whatever}

Originally posted by malfunktion

Wouldnt that make the laws of logic dependent on the human brain? I thought the laws of logic existed in some independent form?

So the laws dont exist apart from somebody's brain?

The conceptualization of the laws of logic, and/or physics, and/or whatever are indeed dependent on the human brain. The things those conceptualizations represent are consequences of the material world.

 

[hammegk]

You need it worse than I do, don't you?

The conceptualization of the laws of logic, and/or physics, and/or whatever are indeed dependent on the human brain. The things those conceptualizations represent are consequences of the material world.

Leave it to you to think that "conceptualization of" and "existence of" are one and the same. Can't you find a few irrelevant links to post too?

 

[Upchurch]

Leave it to you to think that "conceptualization of" and "existence of" are one and the same.

Read it again, hammegk. That is the exact opposite of the point I was making. I was pointing out that the conceptualization of a thing (i.e. that which is information stored in the human brain) is different from the thing itself, which is a consequence of the material world.

At least, from a materialist's point of view.

 

[Yahweh]

I find the discussions of materialism on this board very fascinating.

Quick question: how do materialists explain the existence of abstract concepts in and of themselves? For example, are concepts themselves considered "material" in some way? How would you classify the "laws of logic" as being material?

Concepts are abstract, they dont exist concretely. Because concepts are abstract, they do not exist in a material sense.

Here's a little reference chart:

Abstracta:
Red
Pi
Concepts
Evil

Concreta:
Praying Mantis
Yahweh (Me, not that other Yahweh)
O₂
James Randi Educational Foundation
Gravity

That pretty much answers the question in full.

 

[Yahweh]

Wouldnt that make the laws of logic dependent on the human brain? I thought the laws of logic existed in some independent form?

So the laws dont exist apart from somebody's brain?

Watch out when you play around with Logic.

What Logic IS NOT: A set of laws that govern human behavior.

 

[Lord Kenneth]

The Laws of Logic are concepts that describe how the world works. It depends in what sense you use it as-- the laws themselves are basically how the universe operates, our conceptions of those laws are basically a part of our brain functions.

Love, and other emotions, exist not as a force but as an emotion caused by brain chemistry.

 

[malfunktion]

Watch out when you play around with Logic.

What Logic IS NOT: A set of laws that govern human behavior.

Yeah in reference to laws of logic I was referring to the laws of physics. So I think Im starting to understand the argument. The concepts themselves cannot exist unless there is some mechanism to store and process them?

So if all of human kind died would the laws of physics still hold true and exist? Is this sort of like if a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound?

Your response also brings up a new point, if you say logic does not govern human behavior are you saying all moral codes are "illogical" to some extent? So the law: dont murder doesnt contain some sort of "logic?"

 

[reprise]

The fundamental forces wouldn't cease to exist or start to function in a different manner just because there were no human beings around to observe them - those forces are material in nature.

 

[LuxFerum]

Information.

Information does not exist unless it is embodied in some material. Thoughts, ideas, concepts, like computer programs, would not exist if they were not stored or processed in some material medium.

not really, you can have information in electromagnetic waves and gravitational waves.

 

[Upchurch]

not really, you can have information in electromagnetic waves and gravitational waves.

a.k.a. photons and gravitons via quantum partical/wave duality.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Yeah in reference to laws of logic I was referring to the laws of physics. So I think Im starting to understand the argument. The concepts themselves cannot exist unless there is some mechanism to store and process them?

As concepts, no. The concept of red does not exist without an observer. But the physical properties of a red object exist independently of an observer.

So if all of human kind died would the laws of physics still hold true and exist? Is this sort of like if a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound?

Obviously, as the laws of physics preexisted humans.

Your response also brings up a new point, if you say logic does not govern human behavior are you saying all moral codes are "illogical" to some extent? So the law: dont murder doesnt contain some sort of "logic?"

It contains "some sort" of logic, but it is not basic logic; as we all know there are situations where logic would tell you to kill.

Hans

 

[LuxFerum]

a.k.a. photons and gravitons via quantum partical/wave duality.

yes, but they are not material, and as far as I know, the light only behave like a particle when it hits something.
When light is just traveling around, it is just a wave.

The point is that is possible to have information in "time and space" and not only in material.

 

[Upchurch]

The point is that is possible to have information in "time and space" and not only in material.

But spacetime and energy are also part of the material world. The material world isn't just matter.

 

[LuxFerum]

But spacetime and energy are also part of the material world. The material world isn't just matter.

I get your point, but it should have a new name for that, it looks like a contradiction.