That's only one aspect of it. Materialism treats humans as objects, rather than recognising them as subjects of experience, which in its view has no p...
I don't think I've ever used that as a premise in an argument. But I also don't believe that the human is simply a physical body - I suppose that mean...
That book I referred to before, Manjir Kumar's Quantum, is subtitled 'the great debate about the nature of reality'. Many popular books about quantum ...
Ask almost anyone, and they will say, 'from atoms'. That is the view of the proverbial man in the street isn't it? So I suppose to really get down to ...
That's because you're still criticizing a strawman version of idealism. What I believe idealism argues is that the fundamental constituents of reality...
There are some descriptions that are much more important than others. When I used to debate on Dharmawheel, there were Buddhist scholastics who would ...
Not quite. It's more that facts exist for a mind, which picks out something specific or particular which is designated a fact or an object. 'If I take...
Where, precisely, is the boundary? That's why I made the point, x pages back, about the emergence of consciousness as being marked by the boundary bet...
Surely - as a surmise. But by definition, you will never know that, because if you did know it, then it would be beheld by a mind. Scientific realism ...
As I've explained previously, Kant's transcendental idealism does not deny the existence of the material world. Indeed most idealisms that I'm interes...
Real as opposed to useful conventions. You're interpreting that too literally. It doesn't mean the existence of the summit of Mt Everest doesn't exist...
Very cunning. If I don't agree with you, then I'm culpable, I believe the innocent ought to suffer. It is incumbent on you to make a case. You're simp...
OK, then. Says who? From whom? On what basis? Because your arguments rely on broader issues to do with the nature of morality. It's all about what oug...
So, you're not a Christian, but you believe there's a natural moral law. What is the justification for that? Why do you think it's a matter of what is...
You're confusing legal innocence with the natural condition of humans. The natural condition is such the beings - not only human beings - can be subje...
It's the kind of question to which an answer can only take the form 'it depends on what you mean'. Let me re-iterate - the argument from mathematical ...
Dualism is a useful explanatory metaphor provided it is understood correctly. 'The meaningful connectedness between things — the hierarchical organiza...
Interesting question! Think about what the 'mathematization of nature' that was the basis of the scientific revolution enabled. It was the ability to ...
Correct. Apart from the many other arguments which you here disregard. It is what philosophy is about. And I completely understand that mine is a mino...
At last you see the question I'm asking. I think that classical philosophy understood there are different levels or modes of being - an hierarchy of b...
Fictional creatures and mathematical principles are both things that can only be grasped by a mind, but mathematics possesses a kind of reality which ...
They add: And even though a measurement is a physical act it’s also a cognitive one. ‘Quick! What *is* the aim of all science and all philosophy? Your...
Fair comment, with the caveat that I don't self-identify as Christian (although sympathetic towards Christian Platonism). But I share (often unwilling...
My view of Descartes, as I've said, is the error of making 'res cogitans' a thing - which is an implication of the term 'res'. I agree with the essent...
I don’t agree with that analysis. It’s an attempt to duck the genuine conundrum which really is metaphysical. My interpretation here with a supporting...
And a very convenient one. The Enlightenment philosophes had no hesitation in blaring about LaPlace's Daemon when they felt it supported their lumpen ...
Useful discussion of these points here http://www.quantumphysicslady.org/what-is-the-difference-between-philosophical-idealism-and-philosophical-reali...
Of course. But Einstein was compelled to ask the question 'Doesn't the moon continue to exist when nobody's looking at it?' There are very deep questi...
And you know that, how? What unobserved reality can science tell us of, pray? Odd then that it's called the 'Theory of Relativity'. Perhaps the name c...
That isn't a simple question. I don't recall the exchange, and I don't want to go back digging for it. 'In Special Relativity, neither objects nor tim...
As I keep saying, I'm questioning the culturally-normative sense of scientific realism. As one of the authors I like writes, 'The main problem with ou...
Banno said earlier - We agree on that much at least. From my side, Banno's main influences are Wittgenstein, Davidson, Austin et al, who are influenti...
it doesn't have a position, it can only be described in terms of the wave equation. It's not hiding there in a position unknown, it doesn't have a pos...
I suppose the next logical stop in my reading history was a book called The Theological Origins of Modernity, Michael Allen Gillespie. Have a look at ...
I find myself in the unnaccustomed position of agreeing with you. :yikes: That's the gist of the book I'm reading at this moment. (Also note the disti...
It’s not physically real, it doesn’t exist on the level of physical things. There’s no literal collapse of anything. What happens is that prior to mea...
Yes I did mention that book. Found it very helpful at the time, but that was a long time ago! Still sitting there on my bookshelf alongside the other ...
the wave function does not occupy space. It's a distribution of possibilities, that is all. There's no such actual thing 'out there'. The 'collapse' o...
It's the single most important problem in philosophy as far as I'm concerned. It addresses the very question that you and everyone else puts about the...
Comments