Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
User avatar
The Beast
Posts: 1403
Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by The Beast »

There is a duality. Both are true. If I separate the duality of my hand, what I have is a geometrical configuration formed by cerebral substance and the same configuration formed by energy particles. One is physical; the other is immaterial. The executive function has an area as well. In this case the physical may be a dependent of the immaterial. The physical has fluidity.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Consul »

Steve3007 wrote: July 9th, 2020, 5:36 amIt is the part that I've highlighted in bold that seems most concerned with what I've been saying over the last few posts. It seems incoherent to me to propose that a spatially extended object cannot be considered to have spatially distinct parts/bits/sections/slices which could be the subject of "selective attention", as the quote above puts it, for the purpose of measurement. As I said, measuring an object with a ruler involves aligning parts/bits/sections/slices of the ruler with parts/bits/sections/slices of the object.
If there are extended atoms of space at the Planck level with some nonzero volume, they lack spatial parts (or formal parts, as Thomas Holden would call them); but every region of space with a volume larger than the Planck volume does have spatial parts.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Atla »

Steve3007 wrote: July 9th, 2020, 10:55 am
Atla wrote:That's perfectly fine as long we aren't doing ontology.
OK. So in what field of study is it perfectly fine?

Are you saying that the Earth having two hemispheres is a useful model but is not a truth about the way that the universe is?

If so, can you give an example of something that you regard as an ontological truth?
Ontological truth: the universe has no parts.
(truth = as far as we can tell right now etc. etc.)

But it's pretty much impossible to do any study in any field without dividing the universe into parts.
True philosophy points to the Moon
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Steve3007 »

Consul wrote:If there are extended atoms of space at the Planck level with some nonzero volume, they lack spatial parts...
If we start talking about "atoms of space" I think we'll just complicate things, since that opens up the separate issue of whether we can regard space as a thing. If this conversation is going to continue in any form, I'd prefer to stick to lumps of matter and not get bogged down in specific physics technicalities like the Planck length.

For the same reason, I'm not talking about Quantum Mechanics here. When I said earlier that a part/section of an object can be allowed to become arbitrarily small (but not zero), such that measurements can become arbitrarily accurate (but not 100% accurate), I'm aware that QM contradicts that for empirical reasons. Measurements of various pairs of quantities cannot become arbitrarily accurate. They are limited by the non-zero value of Planck's constant. But I'm not talking about that.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Atla »

Steve3007 wrote: July 9th, 2020, 10:56 am (And why do you always check the "hide my presence" checkbox?)
Not always, I only checked it once. I guess it's easier to troll this way, but if you want I can uncheck it.
True philosophy points to the Moon
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Steve3007 »

Atla wrote:Ontological truth: the universe has no parts.
(truth = as far as we can tell right now etc. etc.)

But it's pretty much impossible to do any study in any field without dividing the universe into parts.
OK. So you're talking about the epistemological necessity for reductionism.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Steve3007 »

Atla wrote:I guess it's easier to troll this way, but if you want I can uncheck it.
No. Don't worry about it. Just curious.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Steve3007 »

Atla wrote:Ontological truth: the universe has no parts.
So what's your take on Terrapin Station's thought experiment about a universe containing a single particle, with no parts/bits/sections/slices, but which he says is growing, and is therefore moving, but to which the notion of speed, he says, cannot be applied?

I presume you would say that the real universe is actually like that (apart from the speed thing, perhaps), but that in order to find out useful stuff about it, we can conceptually (but not ontologically) divide it into parts.

For myself, as I've said more than once, I think his thought experiment is internally incoherent for various reasons.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Terrapin Station »

Atla wrote: July 9th, 2020, 9:37 am The universe doesn't even have parts. The more relevant question is whether or not the universe is pixelated on some minimal scale, like the Planck scale for example (no hologram/simulation fantasy).
The universe having parts simply means that you could, say, slice an orange in two, or take a pill out of a bottle and put it in your mouth instead.

If you want to claim that those things aren't possible, you've got some heavy lifting in front of you.
User avatar
The Beast
Posts: 1403
Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by The Beast »

By point… The Universe can be heterogenous or homogeneous. A point inside the giant photon may have different values of homogeneity in the 0ne point scale.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Terrapin Station »

The Beast wrote: July 9th, 2020, 11:45 am By point… The Universe can be heterogenous or homogeneous. A point inside the giant photon may have different values of homogeneity in the 0ne point scale.
It can't be homogeneous, because I don't try to brush my teeth with the toilet brush.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Atla »

Steve3007 wrote: July 9th, 2020, 11:24 am
Atla wrote:Ontological truth: the universe has no parts.
So what's your take on Terrapin Station's thought experiment about a universe containing a single particle, with no parts/bits/sections/slices, but which he says is growing, and is therefore moving, but to which the notion of speed, he says, cannot be applied?

I presume you would say that the real universe is actually like that (apart from the speed thing, perhaps), but that in order to find out useful stuff about it, we can conceptually (but not ontologically) divide it into parts.

For myself, as I've said more than once, I think his thought experiment is internally incoherent for various reasons.
I'm not sure how to answer that. Two minor issues are that I neither think that a universe can consist of only a single particle (as that may lack symmetry), nor that a universe can actually grow (as I think that change is a supernatural idea), instead the more relevant issue is whether or not our universe is pixelated.

But aside from that, I think that whatever an universe is "made of", those things exist in relation to each other. In other words, there is no external measure by which we can tell that the universe is growing. Growth would probably have to be an internal rearrangement of the universe, and in that case, for all practical purposes, the universe needs to have "parts", even if they are identical parts.
True philosophy points to the Moon
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Steve3007 »

Atla wrote:nor that a universe can actually grow (as I think that change is a supernatural idea)
I've only got time to look at this one part for now. I can see why you would think that the idea that a universe can grow would be "supernatural". I'm not sure I agree in the case of the real universe, but I agree with respect to TS's single homogeneous particle universe. That's one of my objections to the coherence of that thought experiment.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by Consul »

Atla wrote: July 9th, 2020, 11:08 amOntological truth: the universe has no parts.
(truth = as far as we can tell right now etc. etc.)
But it's pretty much impossible to do any study in any field without dividing the universe into parts.
The universe may be one big extended simple substance, in which case it lacks substantial parts, i.e. parts which are substances themselves and independent building blocks of the universe. But it would still have spatial parts. However, in the case of a whole composed of substantial parts the substantial parts are ontologically prior to and independent of the whole, whereas in the case of a whole without substantial parts but with spatial parts, the whole is ontologically prior to the spatial parts and they are dependent on the whole. Extended simples aren't composed of their spatial parts like a brick wall is composed of bricks, which exist independently of and separably from the wall.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
User avatar
The Beast
Posts: 1403
Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm

Re: Can Physicalism be defined non-instrumentally?

Post by The Beast »

The idea of cutting in half is not the same as the one of vibration. Allegorically, it was done by Meitner over the Uranium atom.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021