Arguments agaisnt Materialism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-04-2017, 06:15 AM (This post was last modified: 08-04-2017 08:12 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 02:04 PM)Naielis Wrote:  No it doesn't. Immaterial emergent properties do not exist in positions...

Yes they do. They emerge from SPECIFIC (known) structures in the brain. One can WATCH the processes happen in a PET scan, and WITHOUT the specific structures, in a healthy state, the processes that emerge are absent.

One as TOTALLY ignorant of Neuro-science as you obviously are, is totally INCOMPETENT to make ANY statements about ANYTHING going on in brains.
Give it up Nelly-boy. You tried to write a paper on a subject you know nothing about. Your paper is a joke, just like any paper is, in 2017 by philosophers speculating about brains.
SCIENCE has taken over from woo. You're still back in the woo world.
Philosophers talking about brain function, is nothing but ignorant woo.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
08-04-2017, 06:27 AM (This post was last modified: 08-04-2017 11:27 AM by Chas.)
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 11:53 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 08:18 PM)Chas Wrote:  And pretty much non-existent.


It was never alive.

That's simply isn't true at all. Reductionism is alive and has been since the beginning of the second half of the 20th century. This is because many scientists hold to Identity Theory.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/know-arg/
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mind-identity/

You have failed to show that there are any, let alone many, reductionists of the type you describe.
Those links are irrelevant.

Provide some actual evidence of the existence of these 'reductionists'.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-04-2017, 08:10 AM (This post was last modified: 08-04-2017 10:18 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(07-04-2017 02:04 PM)Naielis Wrote:  No it doesn't. Immaterial emergent properties do not exist in positions...

They emerge from VERY specific positions. Without the specific region, in a healthy state, they do not (ever) emerge. They emerge from SPECIFIC (known) TOTALLY 100 % physical (and ONLY physical) structures in the brain, well oxygenated, with intact blood supplies. One can WATCH the processes happen in a PET scan, and WITHOUT the specific structures, in a healthy state, the processes that emerge are absent.

Broca's region : speech
Frontal lobe : Judgment, foresight, voluntary movement, intellectual and emotional functions, (which when damaged by "infarction" ie lack of blood, in ischemic strokes, hemorrhages - spontaneous, others secondary to tumors, aneurysms, or trauma), impair the functions and leave humans with altered intellectual and emotional functioning.
Brainstem : swallowing, breathing, heartbeat (rate), wake/sleep center, other involuntary functions
Cerebellum : coordination
Wernicke's area : speech comprehension
Occipital lobe : visual reception and integration
Temporal lobe : hearing
Parietal lobe : language integration and comprehension
Sensory cortex : PAIN, heat, other sensory functions
Motor cortex : movement



http://askabiologist.asu.edu/brain-regions
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25027503
http://books.google.com/books?id=Id4vCgA...ke&f=false
http://www.srcburlington.net/information...troke.html
http://www.healthworkscollective.com/eca...ter-stroke
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/dow...1&type=pdf
https://www.thebraintumourcharity.org/un...n-tumours/
http://csn.cancer.org/node/197620
http://www.braintumortreatment.com/Brain...ptoms.aspx
"The cerebrum, the largest part of the brain, is considered the “thinking” part of the brain because this is where thought, analysis and decision-making occur, and where memory is stored. The cerebrum consists of two sides (hemispheres), which store information differently and require back-and-forth communication to process it."

See # 12 :
http://www.cern-foundation.org/education...in-anatomy

http://www.cancercenter.com/brain-cancer/symptoms/
Symptoms of brain cancer are influenced by which part of the brain is involved and the functional system it affects (e.g., motor, sensory, language, etc.). For example, vision problems may result from a tumor near the optic nerve. A tumor in the front part of the brain may affect the ability to concentrate and think.

Click on the various areas to see what SPECIFIC area affects what "emergent property".
http://www.brainline.org/multimedia/inte...oCIPLw_wcB
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4287917/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4449495/
"The emotion circuitry of the brain is complex, involving primarily structures in the prefrontal cortex, amygdale, hippocampus, anterior cingulated cortex, and insular cortex. These structures normally work together to process and generate emotional information and emotional behavior. Research has particularly focused on the prefrontal cortex which, unlike most other brain regions involved in emotion processing, shows asymmetric activation in relation to positive and negative emotions” (17). Davidson and his colleagues have reported large individual differences in baseline levels of asymmetric activation in prefrontal cortex, related to a person’s typical emotional style. Individuals with a positive emotional style show higher levels of left than right prefrontal activation at rest (using EEG or fMRI), while those with a negative emotional style tend to show higher levels of right than left prefrontal activation at rest (18–20). Davidson and colleagues have also reported that, independent of emotional style; induced negative mood increases relative right-sided activation, whereas induced positive mood increases relative left-sided activation (21)."
http://www.kallansklan.org/uploads/FactS...heMind.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_lateralization
http://medlineplus.gov/geneticbraindisorders.html
http://www.kennedykrieger.org/research-t...s-research

http://www.webmd.com/brain/picture-of-the-brain#1

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
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
08-04-2017, 11:30 AM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(08-04-2017 08:10 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Broca's region : speech
Frontal lobe : Judgment, foresight, voluntary movement, intellectual and emotional functions, (which when damaged by "infarction" ie lack of blood, in ischemic strokes, hemorrhages - spontaneous, others secondary to tumors, aneurysms, or trauma), impair the functions and leave humans with altered intellectual and emotional functioning.
Brainstem : swallowing, breathing, heartbeat (rate), wake/sleep center, other involuntary functions
Cerebellum : coordination
Wernicke's area : speech comprehension
Occipital lobe : visual reception and integration
Temporal lobe : hearing
Parietal lobe : language integration and comprehension
Sensory cortex : PAIN, heat, other sensory functions
Motor cortex : movement

Rain Main didn't have a corpus collosum. Plasticity for the motherfuckng win.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-04-2017, 11:47 AM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
I find it pretty funny that Naielis has a negative rating despite being mostly cordial and bringing up points at least partially defensible, even if probably wrong (I am not a property dualist). Yet people who just respond with insults and ad hominems get tons of upvotes simply for having "mic drop moments". None of this discredits your points, just an odd observation. I am not saying Naielis has been above this necessarily (he has not), but I do think the difference in up votes in this conversation between Naielis and say Bucky Ball is un called for. I think it is arguable Naielis did better in this conversation, at least in the information brought to the table. Easily should not be a net negative. Naielis is not even a theist, so I am not understanding this. Does being an atheist commit you to reductive materialism? Historically no. Russell is a notable example. In modernity Michael Tooley, who probably had the best inductive argument from evil against God's existence considers himself a substance dualist. I have not seen all the discussions here, but certainly here the difference is minimal in post quality.

2 Corinthians 10:5
"Every creature is a divine word because it proclaims God" - Bonaventure
"Do no harm. Do good. Stay in love with God." - John Wesley
"The highest service to which a man may obtain on earth is to preach the law of God." - John Wycliffe
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Christian Philosophy's post
08-04-2017, 11:53 AM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(08-04-2017 11:47 AM)Christian Philosophy Wrote:  I have not seen all the discussions here, but certainly here the difference is minimal in post quality.

Yeah there is.
He was trying to defend something with no evidence. If he had EVIDENCE that is ALL that matters. And since you didn't read everything, OR PARTICIPATE you can mind your own fucking business, and keep your shit in the peanut gallery.

Ratings are not necessarily about "cordiality". They are EARNED.
BTW, your signature is one of the MOST idiotic things I have ever read.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
08-04-2017, 12:04 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
Well again, I am talking about his content as well. I think having insulting replies ought to make down voting a serious option. He is providing evidence from Leibniz's law among other things (he would treat these as first principles), and arguing the implications based off what is at the very least a subjective experience, having different properties not explainable by reductive materialism. He then proceeds to state the best explanation is property dualism. The qualitative experience we have are some of the most fundamental experiences around, and incorporating a mechanism to explain the evidence we have from our own brain states seems to be a fine endeavor.

By the way, I am sorry to hear you were not the biggest fan of my signature. That is unfortunate. I like it however, so I think I will keep it.

Thanks,

Christian Philosophy

2 Corinthians 10:5
"Every creature is a divine word because it proclaims God" - Bonaventure
"Do no harm. Do good. Stay in love with God." - John Wesley
"The highest service to which a man may obtain on earth is to preach the law of God." - John Wycliffe
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-04-2017, 12:09 PM (This post was last modified: 08-04-2017 02:37 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
2 Corinthians 10:5
"Every creature is a divine word because it proclaims God" - Bonaventure
"Do no harm. Do good. Stay in love with God." - John Wesley
"The highest service to which a man may obtain on earth is to preach the law of God." - John Wycliffe

There is no "law of God". Every single element of the Jewish and Christian legal systems were appropriated from their ALREADY extant cultures.

If every creature is a 'divine word", then Jesus is not special, is he ?

More quotes maybe I should put in my signature.

"We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity."
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2

"Not all true things are the truth, nor should that truth which merely seems true according to human opinions be preferred to the true truth, that according to the faith."
Clement (quoted by M. Smith, Clement of Alexandria, p446)

John Chrysostom, 5th century theologian and erstwhile bishop of Constantinople: "Do you see the advantage of deceit? For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up for the defects of the mind ... And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived."
Chrysostom, Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1.

"Thus eminent ‘believers’ added falsehood to the beliefs of later generations. ‘For the best of reasons’ they ‘clarified’ obscure points, conjured up characters to speak dialogue that could have been said, invented scenarios that could have happened and borrowed extensively from a wider culture. And this all before they became the custodians of power and had real reasons for lies, inventions and counterfeits. As we shall see, god's immutable laws became as flexible as putty."
St. John Chrysostom

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
08-04-2017, 12:11 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(08-04-2017 12:04 PM)Christian Philosophy Wrote:  Well again, I am talking about his content as well. I think having insulting replies ought to make down voting a serious option. He is providing evidence from Leibniz's law among other things (he would treat these as first principles), and arguing the implications based off what is at the very least a subjective experience, having different properties not explainable by reductive materialism. He then proceeds to state the best explanation is property dualism. The qualitative experience we have are some of the most fundamental experiences around, and incorporating a mechanism to explain the evidence we have from our own brain states seems to be a fine endeavor.

By the way, I am sorry to hear you were not the biggest fan of my signature. That is unfortunate. I like it however, so I think I will keep it.

Thanks,

Christian Philosophy

The qualitative experience we have are some of the most fundamental experiences around, and incorporating a mechanism to explain the evidence we have from our own brain states seems to be a fine endeavor.


Actually it's a waste of time for those who are ignorant of science.
Leibniz (as well as you, and he, and almost ALL philosophers), know nothing about the SCIENCE that is known today about brains. Referencing Leibnitz is a worthless enterprise.

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
08-04-2017, 12:17 PM
RE: Arguments agaisnt Materialism
(08-04-2017 12:04 PM)Christian Philosophy Wrote:  Well again, I am talking about his content as well. I think having insulting replies ought to make down voting a serious option. He is providing evidence from Leibniz's law among other things (he would treat these as first principles),

That is not evidence.

Quote:and arguing the implications based off what is at the very least a subjective experience, having different properties not explainable by reductive materialism.

An unfounded assertion. He didn't demonstrate anything of the sort.

Quote:He then proceeds to state the best explanation is property dualism. The qualitative experience we have are some of the most fundamental experiences around, and incorporating a mechanism to explain the evidence we have from our own brain states seems to be a fine endeavor.

It is not only not the best explanation, it isn't even an explanation. It is based on an unproven claim.

Quote:By the way, I am sorry to hear you were not the biggest fan of my signature. That is unfortunate. I like it however, so I think I will keep it.

I, too, think your signature is stupid.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: