Proof that Materialism is Dead

[Iacchus]

If materialism is dead, then it is true that there is an essence of existence beyond the material. So things that appear dead in the physical world still exist in the other realm. Thus, materialism is not dead!

The thread title contains within it the seeds of its own destruction.

Materialism is, and will always continue to remain a dead end, so long as it adheres to that which is non-transcendant.

 

[Yahweh]

Materialism is, and will always continue to remain a dead end, so long as it adheres to that which is non-transcendant.

The problem is, of course, the "transcendant" (or what people believe to be transcendent) is pitiously out of the grasp of being defined as a testable claim.

Nothing can be said to support belief or disbelief in any said transcendence, therefore the only way to accept it is via blind faith... of course, faith means nothing. Having faith doesnt make anything true or false (because two or more contradictory notions cannot simultaneously be "true" can they?), its just a word to describe a inner-convictions on a personal level.

You can shatter Materialism if you can first define a test of anything transcendent, and furthermore demonstrate said transcendence is factual. Materialism, if you believe it is a dead end, is a breakable barrier nonetheless.

 

[evildave]

Yes, and 'transcendent' ravings will always be a dead end until you consistently apply rigorous scientific standards to their study... at that point, you'll probably just discover that they're a dead end, except as a tool to sell garbage to and control gullible people.

And even proving 'transcendent' things exist, would that truly invalidate the centuries of work calculating how fast a rock will fall, the aerodynamic effects that determine its terminal velocity, etc.?

Would proving there's "something more" make your computer stop working? Cause your car to quit running? Do any of that Y2K nonsense that ignorant people prattled on about? Nope.

At worst, it adds a little caveat:

"Assuming no angels or demons or pixies or spirits jump in to influence the test...."

 

[Anders]

If materialism is dead, then it is true that there is an essence of existence beyond the material. So things that appear dead in the physical world still exist in the other realm. Thus, materialism is not dead!

The thread title contains within it the seeds of its own destruction.

Excuse me! What other realm?? If you imply for instance that stuff that appear dead in our material realm, such as rock, asfalt, iron, would exist in another realm, the immaterial realm? While living stuff like worms, birds, trees, would not apear in the immaterial realm?

Strange, truly strange!

 

[hammegk]

The problem is, of course, the "transcendant" (or what people believe to be transcendent) is pitiously out of the grasp of being defined as a testable claim.

And the problem with that statement is that some flavor of interactive dualism is required for the words to have any meaning. Transcendent or paranormal, same problem.

Materialism ... is a breakable barrier nonetheless.

Actually to maintain it you must agree that Aspect's experimental demonstration of Bell's Theorem was flawed. As a BTW, the experiment to demonstrate the obverse Time related problem, that is, events that occur at the same point are expected by QM to demonstrate "outside of Time" communication, should become possible to perform "soon". Aspect-Bell of course demonstrated that events occuring at different points demonstrate faster than c communication.

Assuming Aspect-Bell is not flawed, either Reality is a non-local phenomena and objective reality exists, or

Reality is a local phenomena, and objective reality does not exist.

Neither option supports materialism, physicalism, naturalism, however you care to term it.

 

[Hexxenhammer]

And it's done! A joke thread has turned serious once again.

 

[hammegk]

Or was that satire?

 

[evildave]

Or there is more to reality than we know... yet. There is probably yet another force to exploit for computation and communication, which can also be treated with materialistic techniques.

http://www.aei-potsdam.mpg.de/~mpoessel/Physik/FTL/tunnelingftl.html
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/FTL.html

I don't think there is a single scientist in the world who thinks mankind knows everything already. What point would there be to waste time looking? As far as I can tell, only young-earthers and such believe they know "everything".

Therefore, there could be additional forces that (when properly modelled), turn out to be even more useful than electricity. Of course, they'll have to be about as repeatable as electricity to be useful to anyone.

So far, I can't think of any non-materialist models that produces anything repeatable.

Can we ask a psychic what will happen tomorrow? Yes, but you may as well have rolled dice.

Can we apply telekenesis to move rocks, or would bulldozers be slightly more effective?

Shall I build a bridge according to Feng Shui, or more conventional engineering and material studies?


I've got a great idea: a digital electronic computer is only one way to build a data processing device. They can be (and have been) built based on a wide variety of switching, fluidic, mechanical, nervoud, etc. models. There are many possible methods (not all practical) to send signals over a distance, as well.

The challenge: Build and demonstrate a data processing or communication device without using any 'materialistic' assumptions.

I fear those pesky computers, radios, TV sets and telephones have set a very high bar of expectation for your creation. Something that can barely beat random guessing in a short, poorly blinded and inconclusive run of tests won't convince anyone that you've invented a new telephone. At least, not anyone without squirrels in their brains.

 

[hammegk]

Gee, evildave, I hope that wasn't in response to my post. If it was, it had nil-nada-zip to do with anything I mentioned.


Your comments sure were a real slap in the face to nuts who believe "supernatural" is possible at any non-zero probability.

 

[Yahweh]

And it's done! A joke thread has turned serious once again.

Well clearly you cannot joke about the most importantest most spectacularest topic most mind-bendingnest topic to ever grace the minds of philosophers: Our God, Materialism.

 

[hammegk]

Well clearly you cannot joke about the most importantest most spectacularest topic most mind-bendingnest topic to ever grace the minds of philosophers: Our God, Materialism.

Why, sure you can. Start a thread in the Humor Forum. Is that thread going to be around in O I wonder? Seems 97%ish to me.

 

[evildave]

Gee, evildave, I hope that wasn't in response to my post. If it was, it had nil-nada-zip to do with anything I mentioned.

Your comments sure were a real slap in the face to nuts who believe "supernatural" is possible at any non-zero probability.

You posed a false dilemma of either:

Assuming Aspect-Bell is not flawed, either Reality is a non-local phenomena and objective reality exists, or

Reality is a local phenomena, and objective reality does not exist.

There is a wide spectrum if possibilities and interpretations having nothing to do with your 'possible' conclusions.

I simply dug up some of the more obvious references for 'quantum tunnelling' (the faster-than-light phenomena you're questioning) and another about faster than light phenomena, then mentioned that it's possible that materialistic science will merely learn something new about something that has additional practical applications.

Then I finished off with a simple challenge for the 'non-materialist' people here.

I simply provide two examples of measurable goals; devices that operate now under materialistic assumptions that you should go ahead and make work based on your "new" science (or pseudo-science) of pretending nothing exists. Do something to reliably communicate information, or something to reliably process information based on non-materialistic assumptions.

Sounds simple enough to me. Prove your 'immaterialism' has something to do with the real world. Start training those leprechauns now.

 

[hammegk]

Yeah, I fibbed in that one other alternative to Aspect-Bell being flawed that leaves materialism intact. Super Determinism; that is, things can only be the way they have been so far, or will ever be. It is all perfectly (pre)determined and could not have unfolded any other way.

evildave
"There is a wide spectrum if possibilities and interpretations having nothing to do with your 'possible' conclusions."

Name one.

evildave
"I simply dug up some of the more obvious references for 'quantum tunnelling' (the faster-than-light phenomena you're questioning) and another about faster than light phenomena ... "

True, but irrelevant to the objective reality / local non-local dilemma.

 

[evildave]

Yeah, I fibbed in that one other alternative to Aspect-Bell being flawed that leaves materialism intact. Super Determinism; that is, things can only be the way they have been so far, or will ever be. It is all perfectly (pre)determined and could not have unfolded any other way.

evildave
"There is a wide spectrum if possibilities and interpretations having nothing to do with your 'possible' conclusions."

Name one.

evildave
"I simply dug up some of the more obvious references for 'quantum tunnelling' (the faster-than-light phenomena you're questioning) and another about faster than light phenomena ... "

True, but irrelevant to the objective reality / local non-local dilemma.

You sound like someone who claims there must be a god because they believe in one, and because they believe in a specific god, that specific god must be the one.

If there is a provable new phenomena, materialism will simply embrace it and expand. The definition for what 'material' is would simply grow.

For now demonstrate how we can build useful things, feed people, cure diseases, etc. by assuming things aren't 'real'.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Come on, will someone get this thread back off track? Geez, it's so serious.

~~ Paul

 

[Iacchus]

You can shatter Materialism if you can first define a test of anything transcendent, and furthermore demonstrate said transcendence is factual. Materialism, if you believe it is a dead end, is a breakable barrier nonetheless.

How about the notion of perfection? It's not possible in the physical sense is it? And yet it is approachable within our minds. How so? Could it be that another realm exists, where perfection is possible? I mean the notion of it has to come from somewhere, right?

 

[evildave]

I can imagine kaleidoscopic dragons flying to/from crystal spires over pixies that dance on rainbows, under vaguely peppermint skies, over hovering dolphins that discuss politics over their sunday tea. The blue sun draws in orange darkness to highlight everything in a haze of wonderful plaid.

I can imagine 'perfection', too. It makes nearly as much sense as the previous paragraph.

I disagree with Yahweh in that Materialism would not 'break', but rather stretch to fit. Another realm? Another force? Another matter? Another phenomena? Demonstrate that it exists, and scientists will fall over each other trying to get measurements and experiments named after themselves. Henries, Farads and Ohms were all named after people. What do you think they named Boyle's law after? Boiling water? *Way* better than getting some nasty disease named after you.

 

[lifegazer]

When people believe something without any rational justification whatsoever, others are quick to call those people gullible nutters.
Hence, all materialists are gullible nutters, since not a one of them can provide any rational argument to show that the abstract sensed-things existing within intangible awareness, ALSO exist apart from that awareness, as real things.
We have zero experience of real things and that is an absolute fact.

For the rational man, materialism is a dodo philosophy.

 

[evildave]

Go kick a rock, Berkeley.

 

[Kerberos]

Ignore this post.