Mercury wrote: ↑October 23rd, 2022, 11:56 amThank you for the informative and interesting quote. Unsurprisingly, I'm inclined to disagree; not least because it requires far greater explanation of Berkeley to refute apparent materialism Johnson demonstrates, than it does to accept the foot and the stone exist - and so falls afoul of Occam's Razor regarding multiplying entities beyond necessity.Consul wrote: ↑October 23rd, 2022, 10:23 amHere's Samuel Johnson's famous "refutation" of Berkeley's immaterialism:
"After we came out of the church, we stood talking for some time together of Bishop Berkeley’s ingenious sophistry to prove the non-existence of matter, and that every thing in the universe is merely ideal. I observed, that though we are satisfied his doctrine is not true, it is impossible to refute it. I never shall forget the alacrity with which Johnson answered, striking his foot with mighty force against a large stone, till he rebounded from it, 'I refute it thus.'"
(Boswell, James. Life of Samuel Johnson, Vol. 1. London: Baldwin, 1791. p. 257)
Unfortunately, Berkeley's immaterialism cannot be refuted in this way. He can simply reply that there are no genuinely material things involved in that situation, because all aspects of it, including the stone and your foot, are nothing but ideas in your mind.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but 3017Metaphysician's multiple threads all seem to suggest that an inability to wholly comprehend a thing, somehow refutes its very existence. That's not a valid inference.
I've been reading in patches, but I thought it was you who cited a quote from Einstein denying the existence of the material world. I don't want to hold you responsible for what others have expressed, like Kaleido's statement here:3017Metaphysician wrote: ↑October 24th, 2022, 8:13 amMecury!
Exclusive materialism not only can't explain material existence (where it came from; why, what, how, etc.) but in the spirit of Berkely, can't explain the causal powers of thoughts and ideas over physical matter (thoughts and ideas causing physical action and behavior-animate and inanimate objects).
The short answer is that reality consists of both material and immaterial phenomena. As per the video, the argument is about primacy. For example, how does the information narrative emerge from the matter narrative. Thoughts and ideas correspond to information processing. And for humans, information itself causes physical action, behavior, and other quality of life stuff relative to one's Will, and feelings about things.
It seems no matter how you analyze it, the exclusivity of materialism is nonsensical.
"Finally, I conclude by reminding you that in a universe in flux there is no material besides the flux. What we call material is merely another kind of immaterial. Words confuse us here, because language presupposes materialism, it presupposes the belief in "things". But in reality there are no "things"."
For it is this - strong metaphysical subjectivism for want of a better term, with which I strongly disagree; as opposed to your rather more modest statement here: "The existence or identity of a thing (or situation) depends on the co-existence of at least two conditions which are opposite to each other, yet dependent on each other."
Of this, I would merely ask - is not the mountain a mountain whether it is observed or not? Was the mountain not a mountain already a million years before anything with two vestiges of intelligence to rub together laid an eye upon it? Did the sea not crash upon the shore a billion times before a human footprint was made in the sand, did not the earth turn into light a billion times, before humans experienced the dawn and thought - mistakenly, that the sun rises?