Arguments agaisnt Materialism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-04-2017, 01:43 PM (This post was last modified: 07-04-2017 06:53 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 01:40 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 01:38 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Ok. So let me get this straight.
He agrees that consciousness emerges from physical elements and processes.
He agrees that "mental properties" emerge from what is (only) physical.
He denies there is any woo intervention.

Yet he thinks he needs to "battle materialism", and write papers about "materialism".
Consider

FacepalmWeeping

Yes I do need to combat reductive materialism. I'm positioning myself on the spectrum. Also, it would've been great if you could've read what I was saying and understood sooner. You've wasted so much time yelling about neuroscience.

Why ? Why do you need to do that ? It simply comes down to a couple simple words in describing what emerges from brains. Why would anyone need to "combat" that ? Are you totally insane ?

I read it, and understood. YOU kept saying I "failed to do the reduction", and THAT was the problem. Now you've TOTALLY changed your position.
You're simply a fucking liar.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 01:44 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 01:41 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 01:39 PM)Naielis Wrote:  When have I ever said otherwise? The struggling is now back to you.

So then, ... remind us why you wrote a paper about "materialism" again, and why you "battle" it.

Because the specific kind of materialism I argued against is wrong. Reductionism in philosophy of mind need to die.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 01:45 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 01:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 01:40 PM)Naielis Wrote:  Yes I do need to combat reductive materialism. I'm positioning myself on the spectrum. Also, it would've been great if you could've read what I was saying and understood sooner. You've wasted so much time yelling about neuroscience.

I read it, and understood. YOU kept saying I "failed to do the reduction", and THAT was the problem. Not you've TOTALLY changed your position.
You're simply a fucking liar.

If only you read more than the intro to my paper you would see that I haven't changed my position at all. The entire time I've argued for property dualism.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 01:46 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 01:44 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 01:41 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  So then, ... remind us why you wrote a paper about "materialism" again, and why you "battle" it.

Because the specific kind of materialism I argued against is wrong. Reductionism in philosophy of mind need to die.

Because ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 01:50 PM (This post was last modified: 07-04-2017 01:53 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 01:45 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 01:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I read it, and understood. YOU kept saying I "failed to do the reduction", and THAT was the problem. Not you've TOTALLY changed your position.
You're simply a fucking liar.

If only you read more than the intro to my paper you would see that I haven't changed my position at all. The entire time I've argued for property dualism.

I read the entire piece of crap. You tried to REDEFINE terms generally used in other ways. You are a VERY poor writer, and most important, the way YOU use the words "property dualism" which you have provided NO evidence for, has absolutely NOTHING to do with how the word "materialism" is normally used.

So you redefine words for yourself, and say you need to "combat" something". Big fucking deal.
All you've done is add (ignorantly) another layer of emergence, (from the entirely physical).
That IS the same as materialism, (for everyone except you).

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 01:50 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 01:46 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 01:44 PM)Naielis Wrote:  Because the specific kind of materialism I argued against is wrong. Reductionism in philosophy of mind need to die.

Because ?

Because reductionism holds a false thesis.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 01:53 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 01:50 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 01:45 PM)Naielis Wrote:  If only you read more than the intro to my paper you would see that I haven't changed my position at all. The entire time I've argued for property dualism.

I read the entire piece of crap. You tried to REDEFINE terms generally used in other ways. You are a VERY poor writer, and most important, the way YOU use the words "property dualism" which you have provided NO evidence for, has absolutely NOTHING to do with how the word "materialism" is normally used.

I'm not a very poor writer at all. I didn't redefine anything. I simply explained the definition of the terms as I would be using them in the paper. Materialism, as I defined it, is not uncommon. The way I defined it is how it is defined by many materialists. And I've provided at least three arguments for property dualism. Again, metaphysical positions don't require empirical evidence.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 01:55 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 01:50 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 01:46 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Because ?

Because reductionism holds a false thesis.

That's not a reason.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 01:57 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 01:50 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  So you redefine words for yourself, and say you need to "combat" something". Big fucking deal.
All you've done is add (ignorantly) another layer of emergence, (from the entirely physical).
That IS the same as materialism, (for everyone except you).

Actually no it's not. This is not how materialism is generally used. Materialism doesn't accept the existence of actual mental properties. Some forms of physicalism could. But materialism, as it is usually defined, does not.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2017, 01:57 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 01:55 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 01:50 PM)Naielis Wrote:  Because reductionism holds a false thesis.

That's not a reason.

Something being false isn't a reason to combat it? Hmm...

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: