what if our current views are wrong?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-01-2013, 01:28 PM
RE: what if our current views are wrong?
(31-01-2013 01:20 PM)Scientia Wrote:  
(31-01-2013 04:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  I'm talking about biology, chemistry, and physics which deal with existence and consciousness.
Our minds are an emergent property of our brains. When your brain dies, there is no mind.
Biology and chemistry are not the same as metaphysics. They overlap in some ways but they are distinct in what they cover. For example consciousness can be looked at as an efficacious force
in the evolution of the species.
Quote:Half a century ago, many did not think it was possible to understand the
secret of life. Then two scientists, Jim Watson and Francis Crick,
discovered the structure of DNA, forever changing biology and the way we
view ourselves in the natural order of things. We are now once again
facing a similar pursuit in determining the material basis of the
conscious mind. Consciousness is one of the major unsolved problem in
science
http://www.ircs.upenn.edu/pinkel/lecture...ndex.shtml


Metaphysics goes beyond the physical:
Quote:[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]While physics is the study of physical reality, metaphysics includes that which is beyond the physical, but not necessarily the spiritual. Spiritual metaphysics
takes an entirely different orientation. Spiritual metaphysics sees an
ultimate, metaphysical source of all creation as the basis of reality[/font]
[/font]
http://www.infinitebeing.com/0612/spirit...hysics.htm

Also:





Chemistry when is comes to consciousness is dealing with reductionism. Philosophers such as Kant and Hegel have debated this. Today, the question that is being debated is could consciousness (as we know it) ever be reduced to a set
of nerve cells and chemical interactions in the brain?

So you are not totally wrong, we are obviously approaching the OP from two different directions, lets pick one of the three; because if we don't, we won't too much agree on anything.

Quote:Dualism is a myth.
In what way? First lets get it defined.
Quote:In the philosophy of mind, dualism is the
theory that the mental and the physical—or mind and body or
mind and brain—are, in some sense, radically different kinds
of things.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dualism/


du·al·ism
noun \ˈdü-ə-ˌli-zəm also ˈdyü-\

Quote:Definition of DUALISM


1
: a theory that considers reality to consist of two irreducible elements or modes

2
: the quality or state of being dual or of having a dual nature
3
a : a doctrine that the universe is under the dominion of two opposing principles one of which is good and the other evil b : a view of human beings as constituted of two irreducible elements (as matter and spirit)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dualism

You, yourself said:
Quote:When your brain dies, there is no mind.
If this is the case, where did the mind/consciousness go? When the body dies, the brain and all the other organs remain with the body. You can physically touch, and see them, but why can't we do this with the mind? Dualism is a theory, and a theory is a set of facts based on analysis. But I can't argue with your opinion on dualism because you can't disprove someone's belief.

If dualism is a theory can you post the theory for review?

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-01-2013, 01:38 PM
RE: what if our current views are wrong?
(31-01-2013 01:28 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  If dualism is a theory can you post the theory for review?
No problem:
Quote:THE DUALIST THEORY OF MIND
THE THEORY
1. A person is made of two different substances: mind and body.
2. It was the view of Socrates and Plato, was championed by Descartes, and seems basic to religions that believe in immortality.
3. There are three versions, depending on the causal link between the two substances:
http://www.philosophyideas.com/files/min...ualism.pdf

Sorry wrong link.

http://www.academia.edu/1424724/THEORY_O...F_RELIGION

Science investigates, religion interprets.

I got my first like....[Image: weeping.gif] Thank you!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-01-2013, 01:40 PM
RE: what if our current views are wrong?
Metaphysics goes beyond reality into fantasy.

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-01-2013, 01:47 PM
RE: what if our current views are wrong?
(31-01-2013 01:40 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Metaphysics goes beyond reality into fantasy.
This would be a fair assessment because it deals with things we can't see, touch, or make happen. For example, creating our own reality through thought.

Science investigates, religion interprets.

I got my first like....[Image: weeping.gif] Thank you!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-01-2013, 01:55 PM
RE: what if our current views are wrong?
(31-01-2013 01:38 PM)Scientia Wrote:  
(31-01-2013 01:28 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  If dualism is a theory can you post the theory for review?
No problem:
Quote:THE DUALIST THEORY OF MIND
THE THEORY
1. A person is made of two different substances: mind and body.
2. It was the view of Socrates and Plato, was championed by Descartes, and seems basic to religions that believe in immortality.
3. There are three versions, depending on the causal link between the two substances:
http://www.philosophyideas.com/files/min...ualism.pdf

Sorry wrong link.

http://www.academia.edu/1424724/THEORY_O...F_RELIGION
I haven't quite dug in yet but I must ask, how do they deal with brain damage?

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-01-2013, 01:56 PM
RE: what if our current views are wrong?
(31-01-2013 01:47 PM)Scientia Wrote:  
(31-01-2013 01:40 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Metaphysics goes beyond reality into fantasy.
This would be a fair assessment because it deals with things we can't see, touch, or make happen. For example, creating our own reality through thought.
Creating your own FANTASY through thought.

And things you can't see, touch, or make happen? That is just vague enough to not make any sense either. We can't see, touch, or even induce fusion of Silicon atoms in the heart of a star, but it is not a metaphysical claim.

Please restructure your metaphysics definition to mean "describing a fantasy world that is devoid of all reality and is nothing more than an illusion of wishful thinking."

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
31-01-2013, 02:13 PM
RE: what if our current views are wrong?
(31-01-2013 01:55 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  I haven't quite dug in yet but I must ask, how do they deal with brain damage?
To what extent? But as to not waste a post lets see if we can get this defined. Brain damage is the destruction or degeneration of brain cells. This is all physical, but it says nothing about the mind. A concussion is a brain injury but people can, and do function and are aware of themselves and their surroundings. This is because the brain is a physical object that can be seen with the eyes, and touched with the hands. The mind, on the other hand, is not a physical object. It cannot be
seen with the eyes, nor can it be touched by the hands. But we do have it, and it is separate from the brain.

If I'm going down the wrong path, can you elaborate more on what you are trying to ask?

Science investigates, religion interprets.

I got my first like....[Image: weeping.gif] Thank you!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-01-2013, 02:41 PM (This post was last modified: 31-01-2013 02:44 PM by Scientia.)
RE: what if our current views are wrong?
Quote:Creating your own FANTASY through thought.
One man's reality is another man's fantasy Rolleyes

But yes, creating our own reality through thought.
Quote:Our personal truths are our beliefs - and our beliefs are what we use
to make our choices and decisions. This in turn plays a huge part in creating our own reality.
http://bodysoulmind.net/mind/creatingourownreality

Quote:And things you can't see, touch, or make happen? That is just vague
enough to not make any sense either.
This is what makes some thing hard to accept or believe.
Quote:We can't see, touch, or even induce
fusion of Silicon atoms in the heart of a star
Are you sure? are you sure you know what you are talking about? A silicon atom? Lets see, the sun is a star, and fusion is processed at it's core, and that fusion consist of hydrogen atoms colliding with helium atoms. And we see the result of this fusion in the form of light and heat. Sorry, I don't see a silicon atom (si) nowhere in this operation. Now, if you are aware of some knowledge that I'm not please post it. If you do, make sure it encompass all stars.


Quote:but it is not a
metaphysical claim.
I didn't say it did, If I did, show me where I did.

Quote:Please restructure your metaphysics definition to mean "describing a
fantasy world that is devoid of all reality and is nothing more than an
illusion of wishful thinking."
No I won't for several reasons:
1) You have no empirical evidence to show why this should be done.
2) This conclusion of your makes no sense.
3) People that have spent a life time working in this field know it better than you or I.
4) You approach this with a mocking tone rather than sincere interest
5) Show me where the sources I've used to define metaphysics is wrong.

Science investigates, religion interprets.

I got my first like....[Image: weeping.gif] Thank you!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-01-2013, 02:49 PM
RE: what if our current views are wrong?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon-burning_process

It is the last fusion that occurs in stars as it produces iron which can't be fused because it is an energy-consuming reaction and not an energy-producing reaction. Ergo it is Endothermic and not Exothermic.

Provide evidence for the claim metaphysics exists. That is the claim being proposed.

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-01-2013, 03:02 PM
RE: what if our current views are wrong?
(31-01-2013 01:20 PM)Scientia Wrote:  
(31-01-2013 04:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  I'm talking about biology, chemistry, and physics which deal with existence and consciousness.
Our minds are an emergent property of our brains. When your brain dies, there is no mind.
Biology and chemistry are not the same as metaphysics. They overlap in some ways but they are distinct in what they cover. For example consciousness can be looked at as an efficacious force
in the evolution of the species.
Quote:Half a century ago, many did not think it was possible to understand the
secret of life. Then two scientists, Jim Watson and Francis Crick,
discovered the structure of DNA, forever changing biology and the way we
view ourselves in the natural order of things. We are now once again
facing a similar pursuit in determining the material basis of the
conscious mind. Consciousness is one of the major unsolved problem in
science
http://www.ircs.upenn.edu/pinkel/lecture...ndex.shtml


Metaphysics goes beyond the physical:
Quote:[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][font=Times New Roman, Times, serif]While physics is the study of physical reality, metaphysics includes that which is beyond the physical, but not necessarily the spiritual. Spiritual metaphysics
takes an entirely different orientation. Spiritual metaphysics sees an
ultimate, metaphysical source of all creation as the basis of reality[/font]
[/font]
http://www.infinitebeing.com/0612/spirit...hysics.htm

Also:





Chemistry when is comes to consciousness is dealing with reductionism. Philosophers such as Kant and Hegel have debated this. Today, the question that is being debated is could consciousness (as we know it) ever be reduced to a set
of nerve cells and chemical interactions in the brain?

So you are not totally wrong, we are obviously approaching the OP from two different directions, lets pick one of the three; because if we don't, we won't too much agree on anything.

Quote:Dualism is a myth.
In what way? First lets get it defined.
Quote:In the philosophy of mind, dualism is the
theory that the mental and the physical—or mind and body or
mind and brain—are, in some sense, radically different kinds
of things.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dualism/


du·al·ism
noun \ˈdü-ə-ˌli-zəm also ˈdyü-\

Quote:Definition of DUALISM


1
: a theory that considers reality to consist of two irreducible elements or modes

2
: the quality or state of being dual or of having a dual nature
3
a : a doctrine that the universe is under the dominion of two opposing principles one of which is good and the other evil b : a view of human beings as constituted of two irreducible elements (as matter and spirit)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dualism

You, yourself said:
Quote:When your brain dies, there is no mind.
If this is the case, where did the mind/consciousness go? When the body dies, the brain and all the other organs remain with the body. You can physically touch, and see them, but why can't we do this with the mind? Dualism is a theory, and a theory is a set of facts based on analysis. But I can't argue with your opinion on dualism because you can't disprove someone's belief.

Dualism is a hypothesis without any supporting evidence.

The mind/consciousness is an active pattern in a living brain. No living brain, no active pattern. There is no 'thing' to go anywhere, it just falls apart.
Where does your program 'go' when you shut the computer off? Same place - nowhere.

Also, you seem to be one who thinks 'reductionist' is a dirty word. Consider

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: