|
soldatheero
lastirishman


Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,856
Loc:
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: soldatheero]
#15644960 - 01/10/12 01:08 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The argument that experience is non-physical is essentially circular: "Consciousness wouldn't be consciousness if it were physical, because the physical isn't conscious!" Read soldatheero's posts above for a perfect example of this type of fallacy.
What people so often fail to take into account is what the words they're using (i.e. "experience" and "matter") actually refer to, when all is said and done. Anyone saying "it's just obvious that experience isn't physical!" must be defining physical in a way that is absolutely useless, because if experience isn't physical then what is? The only evidence we have for the existence of the physical world comes through our experience.
So what are you saying? All physicality is experience? Experience doesn't arise at any point in time? Do rocks have experience? From your definition of physical it stands to reason that all physicality is experience, hence atoms are experience.
Materialists believe experience occurs at a certain point in complexity of inert matter do they not?
I really don't understand your position, you seem to be an idealist without realizing it or something.
-------------------- ..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
4896744
Small Town Girl


Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: soldatheero] 1
#15645255 - 01/10/12 02:13 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said:
So what are you saying? All physicality is experience? Experience doesn't arise at any point in time? Do rocks have experience? From your definition of physical it stands to reason that all physicality is experience, hence atoms are experience.
Rocks don't experience because they do not have the proper configuration of matter to form what we label as experience. Experience is caused by the structure of our species' brain and likely that of other species. A diamond cannot be scratched and even though it is matter like marble, marble can still be scratched. This is due to their respective configurations of matter, not because one of them is something other than matter.
-------------------- Live your Life!
Edited by iThink (01/10/12 02:14 PM)
|
soldatheero
lastirishman


Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,856
Loc:
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: 4896744]
#15645413 - 01/10/12 02:44 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Rocks don't experience because they do not have the proper configuration of matter to form what we label as experience
See you are acknowledging a distinction between matter and experience by saying "matter to form what we label experience."
Rocks are made of matter yet there is no experience. Hence a distinction between matter and experience.
Samarai seems to imply matter can be made synonymous with experience and therefore implies all matter should have experience since IT IS experience.
-------------------- ..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
4896744
Small Town Girl


Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: soldatheero]
#15645668 - 01/10/12 03:27 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said:
Quote:
Rocks don't experience because they do not have the proper configuration of matter to form what we label as experience
See you are acknowledging a distinction between matter and experience by saying "matter to form what we label experience."
Rocks are made of matter yet there is no experience. Hence a distinction between matter and experience.
Samarai seems to imply matter can be made synonymous with experience and therefore implies all matter should have experience since IT IS experience.
Where did I acknowledge a distinction? I just showed you how your example was wrong too, rocks are made of matter and don't experience because of how the matter is configured, just like diamond is harder to scratch than marble even though they are both just made of matter. Being made of matter does not negate the existence of what we label as properties.
-------------------- Live your Life!
|
soldatheero
lastirishman


Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,856
Loc:
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: 4896744]
#15645754 - 01/10/12 03:44 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Here is the difference in your hardness analogy and experience.
Both diamond and sandstone have some degree of hardness. They both have hardness a diamon simply has more hardness. In this case no new element is required to create more hardness as a degree of hardness alreaday exists in both minerals.
You are claiming a rock has zero consciousness and than in a brain all of a sudden some configuration of matter causes consciousness to EMERGE.
-------------------- ..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
4896744
Small Town Girl


Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: soldatheero]
#15645801 - 01/10/12 03:55 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said: Here is the difference in your hardness analogy and experience.
Both diamond and sandstone have some degree of hardness. They both have hardness a diamon simply has more hardness. In this case no new element is required to create more hardness as a degree of hardness alreaday exists in both minerals.
Ok then, Radon is radioactive and made of matter, and oxygen is not radioactive and made of matter. This is due to their composition.
Quote:
You are claiming a rock has zero consciousness and than in a brain all of a sudden some configuration of matter causes consciousness to EMERGE.
I would assume that varying degrees or types of experience are present in various species' brains.
-------------------- Live your Life!
|
soldatheero
lastirishman


Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,856
Loc:
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: 4896744]
#15646025 - 01/10/12 04:38 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
When you talk about "a brain" you are talking about elementary particles and physical ingredients as obviously that is all a brain is. So you are still picking a point in which consciousness emerges from physical ingredients and you are calling that point "a brain".
Quote:
Radon is radioactive and made of matter, and oxygen is not radioactive and made of matter. This is due to their composition.
No new physical ingredient actually emerges inbetween something we classify as radioactive and something that is not. Radioactivity is directly inferred by the actions of fundamental particles.
Consider a solid vs a liquid. In reality nothing actually emerges when one changes to the other, no new elements are actually introduced only an arrangement in the atoms. It is a categorical mistake of the mind to actually think something is emerged when a liquid becomes a gas.
In cases such as radioactivity and phases of matter, reductionism is valid. Reductionism means reducing our misconceptions and reducing things we think exist down to their fundamental building blocks and asserting that NOTHING actually emerges.
To say consciousness can be reduced down to physical components is the same as saying consciousness is an illusion (non-existent) because that what reductionism is, it is reducing our misconceptions. The existence of consciousness in this case is the misconception.
That or you can believe consciousness begins to occur with the configuration of the brain. If you do this than you require consciousness to emerge out of physical processes, which happens no where in nature because all other physical happenings can be reduced down to the behaviour of physical properties.
-------------------- ..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
4896744
Small Town Girl


Registered: 03/06/10
Posts: 5,128
Loc: United States
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: soldatheero]
#15646160 - 01/10/12 05:02 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
To say consciousness can be reduced down to physical components is the same as saying consciousness is an illusion (non-existent) because that what reductionism is, it is reducing our misconceptions. The existence of consciousness in this case is the misconception.
You have failed to say why consciousness is an illusion if it is nothing more than its physical components. All you keep on doing is claiming that consciousness can't be physical with no justification whatsoever.
-------------------- Live your Life!
|
blingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: soldatheero]
#15646586 - 01/10/12 06:38 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
you just keep playing word games trying to make us feel like we've given in to you. forcing your definitions on the way someone understand a subject doesn't make you right. you act like if someone uses the word emerge with reference to consciousness they are automatically a dualist. mind is an emergent property of the nervous system and environment just as digestion is an emergent property of the stomach, varies other organs and food. it is entirely physical. the argument that consciousness is non-physical because it is consciousness is bullshit to me. i might as well say consciousness is a baloney sandwich because it is consciousness.
To say consciousness can be reduced down to physical components is the same as saying consciousness is an illusion
consciousness is an illusion made of sensory information which represents the world inside and around an individual. when the sensory information ceases to represent the world as it is we call this delusion. both illusion and delusion exist as physical properties of the human mind (environment, nervous system).
-------------------- Kupo said: let's fuel the robots with psilocybin. cez said: everyone should smoke dmt for religion. dustinthewind13 said: euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building. White Beard said: if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.
|
NetDiver
Wandering Mindfuck


Registered: 08/24/09
Posts: 6,024
Loc: Everywhere and Nowhere
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: blingbling]
#15649013 - 01/11/12 07:51 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I actually do think "emergence" is totally bullshit and does imply duality, especially as it is the preferred theory of philosophers who believe the mental cannot be reduced to the physical. I much prefer functionalism; the idea that mental states just are functional states of the brain.
Quote:
soldatheero said: So what are you saying? All physicality is experience? Experience doesn't arise at any point in time? Do rocks have experience? From your definition of physical it stands to reason that all physicality is experience, hence atoms are experience.
I don't think that "stands to reason" at all, plus you'd have to explain the claim that "all physicality is experience." Physics is a mathematical model based on empirical observations given through sense-data (empiricism actually is the philosophical school which claims that knowledge of the world derives from the senses). And just because senses = the physical does not mean that rocks experience, just that they exist within what could be variably called "experience" or "the natural Universe."
Quote:
Materialists believe experience occurs at a certain point in complexity of inert matter do they not?
I really don't understand your position, you seem to be an idealist without realizing it or something.
I only "seem to be an idealist" because you still think there is some difference between matter and what you call "mind." Check out neutral monism.
“What I wish to do…is to re-state the relations of mind and brain in terms not implying the existence of either.” -- Bertrand Russell
Edited by NetDiver (01/11/12 08:00 AM)
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,409
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: NetDiver]
#15649785 - 01/11/12 11:54 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
i think the perception of emergence is the illusion, not the emergence itself. i side with the materialist school of thought in the sense of everything being all made up of the same stuff but manifesting in different forms. but to say that mind is purely physical is a misapprehension of the materialist position from my understanding of it.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
blingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: NetDiver]
#15650718 - 01/11/12 03:15 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
what's your interpretation of the weak vs strong emergence argument?
-------------------- Kupo said: let's fuel the robots with psilocybin. cez said: everyone should smoke dmt for religion. dustinthewind13 said: euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building. White Beard said: if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.
|
millzy


Registered: 05/12/10
Posts: 12,409
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: blingbling]
#15651279 - 01/11/12 05:26 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
blingbling said: what's your interpretation of the weak vs strong emergence argument?
i'd say that would be determined by the material it is emerging from. it's all the same, but when it hits the point of physical manifestation it only has so much it can do after that.
-------------------- I'm up to my ears in unwritten words. - J.D. Salinger
|
soldatheero
lastirishman


Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,856
Loc:
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: millzy]
#15655378 - 01/12/12 01:44 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I don't think that "stands to reason" at all, plus you'd have to explain the claim that "all physicality is experience." Physics is a mathematical model based on empirical observations given through sense-data (empiricism actually is the philosophical school which claims that knowledge of the world derives from the senses). And just because senses = the physical does not mean that rocks experience, just that they exist within what could be variably called "experience" or "the natural Universe."
Conveniently enough you leave out the word EXPERIENCE in your synopsis of empiricism.
Quote:
Empiricism is a theory of knowledge that asserts that knowledge comes only or primarily via sensory experience
Sense EXPERIENCE. Our experiences are derived from our sensing of the world, but there is no mention of whether or not this sensing is purely physical.
Just look at the word empiricism and notice the similarity to the word experience.
Empiricism is the philosophical school which claims knowledge of the world comes through experience, which comes through sensing. Experience is fundamental to science.
Quote:
It is a fundamental part of the scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world rather than resting solely on a priori reasoning, intuition, or revelation.
OBSERVATIONS as in the observations of a observing experiencing human being.
From wiki
Quote:
The English term "empiric" derives from the Greek word ἐμπειρία, which is cognate with and translates to the Latin experiential, from which we derive the word "experience" and the related "experiment". The term was used of the Empiric school of ancient Greek medical practitioners, who rejected the doctrines of the (Dogmatic school), preferring to rely on the observation of phenomena.[2]
Quote:
I only "seem to be an idealist" because you still think there is some difference between matter and what you call "mind."
Again yes I do because there is a difference. Physical has no experience, mind is experience.
-------------------- ..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
Edited by soldatheero (01/12/12 01:47 PM)
|
NetDiver
Wandering Mindfuck


Registered: 08/24/09
Posts: 6,024
Loc: Everywhere and Nowhere
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
|
Re: Materialistic, Nihlistic, Egomaniacs. [Re: blingbling]
#15655796 - 01/12/12 03:04 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
blingbling said: what's your interpretation of the weak vs strong emergence argument?
Weak emergence is misguided epiphenomenalism, strong emergence is magic. Both are dualist "theories." (I use quotes because they have not passed the empirical and methodological requirements necessary to be regarded as theories in the same vein as evolution and gravity, and instead are stuck in the "duuuude, what if?" category).
|
|