Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko »

A Physicalist is a Physical Monist or Material Monist. They Believe that all Conscious Phenomena can be explained by Physical Material Phenomena. Some Physicalists go so far as to discount Conscious Phenomena as even Existing at all. The Physicalists have complained about three basic statements that I have made. They seem to show an emotionalism in their replies that reveals a hidden frustration with their inability to address the statements in any coherent way. They are getting more and more Delirious. They are self appointed Guardians of the knowledge base of Science but that knowledge base is empty with regard to questions about Consciousness. They will not admit that there is Zero Scientific understanding of Consciousness so they resort to Insults and other Diversionary tactics that only reveal their ignorance. If Science cannot deal with Something then that Something can only be Supernatural or Religious in their way of thinking. They therefore need to make that Something go away rather than trying to study it more and come up with a Scientific Explanation. This necessarily implies that they think that Science has obtained all the knowledge that it will ever obtain. But this is not the Science that I know. I have been taught and expect that Science is discovering New Phenomena all the time. Here are the three statements that annoy the Physicalists to the point of mental breakdown:

1) Science has Zero, I repeat Zero, understanding with regard to Consciousness.

2) Conscious Experiences are in a whole different Category of Phenomena than any known Scientific Category of Phenomena.

3) The Conscious Experience of Pain can give an Organism or Animal a statistical Evolutionary survival advantage that can affect the Evolution of that Organism or Animal.

As for the first statement, the Physicalists say things like: The Neural Activity IS the Conscious Activity and then they say that Explains it, end of discussion. This is Naive and Shallow beyond all reasonableness. It isn't even a good Scientific guess. It is Pure Belief. It's so bad I have to think the Physicalists are not really serious when they say things like this but are just messing with me. They think that Measuring Neural Activity IS the same thing as Measuring the Conscious Activity. They are Measuring the Neural Correlates of Conscious Experience not the Conscious Experience itself. They treat the actual Conscious Experience as if it did not even exist. I can not understand how they get to this point in their Physicalist delirium. To perpetuate the Physicalist Belief they must Deny the actual existence of the Conscious Experience. The Conscious Experience of something like the Redness of Red is a Self Evident reality of the Universe, and they deny it. The Conscious Experience of Redness is something that Science cannot Explain. The Self evident reality of it is that it exists only in the Mind. They know the Redness exists in the Mind because they See it too but still they must deny this Self Evident Phenomenon of Consciousness because if it did exist Science would have to Explain it. But Science cannot Explain it at this point in time.

The second statement points out how the Physicalists might come to understand that Science doesn't have any Knowledge of what Conscious Experience could be. If Conscious Experience could be found to be in any known Category of Scientific Phenomena then Science would have had a lot to say about Consciousness by now. Instead we get Silence. Conscious Experience is in a Category all by itself and this new Category of Phenomena has not been integrated into the Scientific knowledge base yet. Science does not know what to do with this Category of Phenomena. Since Science does not know what to do with this Category of Conscious Phenomena the Physicalists say it is Supernatural or Religious. It's neither of these, it's simply not understood yet. Don't be afraid you little Physicalists, those scary Conscious Experiences will not hurt you.

I think the third statement is completely sensible from even the most basic understanding of Evolutionary mechanisms. The Physicalists completely oppose this statement however. I don't know how they can justify thinking that the Conscious Experience of Pain will not actually increase the statistical Evolutionary survival advantage for an Organism or Animal and thus influence Evolutionary outcomes. And it is not just Pain but all the multitudes of other Conscious Experiences that exist in the Universe. It is a logical conclusion to state that even primitive Consciousness can influence Evolution. Evolution is not a completely Mindless, Bio Electrical Chemical, DNA Mutating, Environmentally Influenced process. Rather, Evolution is driven by a combination of primitive Conscious Desires, Bio Electrical Chemical processes, Random DNA Mutations, and Environmental Influences. I suppose the opposition to this is because it admits the existence of Conscious Experience which they Deny. So because they have to Deny Conscious Experience they must Deny a basic premise of Evolution. They say that Evolutionary literature does not mention Conscious Experience so therefore the Conscious Experience of Pain cannot influence Evolutionary outcomes. This takes Shallow thinking and fear of what's outside the Box to extremes. I'll go so far as to say that if Evolutionary literature does not take into account Conscious Experience then Evolutionary literature needs a Big Update.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by Consul »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 11:39 amAs for the first statement, the Physicalists say things like: The Neural Activity IS the Conscious Activity and then they say that Explains it, end of discussion.
No, that's not the "end of discussion", because "the primary goals of consciousness science are to explain, predict, and control the phenomenological properties of conscious experience. This means explaining why a particular conscious experience is the way it is – why it has the phenomenological properties that it has – in terms of physical mechanisms and processes in the brain and body. These explanations should enable us to predict when specific subjective experiences will occur, and enable their control through intervening in the underlying mechanisms. In short, addressing the real problem requires explaining why a particular pattern of brain activity – or other physical process – maps to a particular kind of conscious experience, not merely establishing that it does."

(Seth, Anil. Being You: A New Science of Consciousness. New York: Dutton, 2021. p. 25)
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by Consul »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 11:39 am …It's so bad I have to think the Physicalists are not really serious when they say things like this but are just messing with me. They think that Measuring Neural Activity IS the same thing as Measuring the Conscious Activity. They are Measuring the Neural Correlates of Conscious Experience not the Conscious Experience itself.
To say that the neural correlates of experiences are different from these is to presuppose dualism and thereby to beg the question, since, according to reductive physicalism, those neural processes which are correlates of experiences are the experiences themselves. If this is true, then measuring neural correlates of experience means measuring experience.

By the way, if correlation isn't a reflexive relation, i.e. if nothing is correlated with itself, then there are no (ontological) psychophysical correlations if the physicalist identity theory is true.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko »

Consul wrote: May 6th, 2022, 12:55 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 11:39 amAs for the first statement, the Physicalists say things like: The Neural Activity IS the Conscious Activity and then they say that Explains it, end of discussion.
No, that's not the "end of discussion", because "the primary goals of consciousness science are to explain, predict, and control the phenomenological properties of conscious experience. This means explaining why a particular conscious experience is the way it is – why it has the phenomenological properties that it has – in terms of physical mechanisms and processes in the brain and body. These explanations should enable us to predict when specific subjective experiences will occur, and enable their control through intervening in the underlying mechanisms. In short, addressing the real problem requires explaining why a particular pattern of brain activity – or other physical process – maps to a particular kind of conscious experience, not merely establishing that it does."

(Seth, Anil. Being You: A New Science of Consciousness. New York: Dutton, 2021. p. 25)
I agree with what you are saying, but there are many of these Physicalists that will say Consciousness IS the Neurons, and will argue for years that I'm just not understanding the Deep and Profound meaning of their statement.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko »

Consul wrote: May 6th, 2022, 1:05 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 11:39 am …It's so bad I have to think the Physicalists are not really serious when they say things like this but are just messing with me. They think that Measuring Neural Activity IS the same thing as Measuring the Conscious Activity. They are Measuring the Neural Correlates of Conscious Experience not the Conscious Experience itself.
To say that the neural correlates of experiences are different from these is to presuppose dualism and thereby to beg the question, since, according to reductive physicalism, those neural processes which are correlates of experiences are the experiences themselves. If this is true, then measuring neural correlates of experience means measuring experience.
That is a big If, with no real justification other than they don't know where else or how to look.
Consul wrote: May 6th, 2022, 1:05 pm By the way, if correlation isn't a reflexive relation, i.e. if nothing is correlated with itself, then there are no (ontological) psychophysical correlations if the physicalist identity theory is true.
Whether the Physicalist Identity Theory is true or whether the Connectist Connection Theory is true, will be decided Scientifically and with good Reasoning and Chains of Logic after some period of time with more Research. Right now the Identity Theory has no basis in any kind of Science. It is merely a Guess. The Connectist Theory is also a Guess right now. However, I like my Guess better than yours.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by Consul »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 1:13 pmI agree with what you are saying, but there are many of these Physicalists that will say Consciousness IS the Neurons, and will argue for years that I'm just not understanding the Deep and Profound meaning of their statement.
What reductive physicalists are saying is that the (constitutive) neural mechanisms of experiences are identical with the experiences. To have an experience is to have some neural mechanism implemented in one's brain which is (identical with) the experience. Of course, there are things to explain: What makes the general difference between an experiential neural mechanism and a nonexperiential one? What makes the specific difference between this experiential neural mechanism and that experiential one?
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by Consul »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 1:21 pmWhether the Physicalist Identity Theory is true or whether the Connectist Connection Theory is true, will be decided Scientifically and with good Reasoning and Chains of Logic after some period of time with more Research. Right now the Identity Theory has no basis in any kind of Science. It is merely a Guess. The Connectist Theory is also a Guess right now. However, I like my Guess better than yours.
Call it a "guess", but reductive materialism about consciousness is by far the best, most promising guess. Dualism has no explanatory advantage at all—on the contrary, scientifically it's a dead end.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7932
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by LuckyR »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 11:39 am A Physicalist is a Physical Monist or Material Monist. They Believe that all Conscious Phenomena can be explained by Physical Material Phenomena. Some Physicalists go so far as to discount Conscious Phenomena as even Existing at all. The Physicalists have complained about three basic statements that I have made. They seem to show an emotionalism in their replies that reveals a hidden frustration with their inability to address the statements in any coherent way. They are getting more and more Delirious. They are self appointed Guardians of the knowledge base of Science but that knowledge base is empty with regard to questions about Consciousness. They will not admit that there is Zero Scientific understanding of Consciousness so they resort to Insults and other Diversionary tactics that only reveal their ignorance. If Science cannot deal with Something then that Something can only be Supernatural or Religious in their way of thinking. They therefore need to make that Something go away rather than trying to study it more and come up with a Scientific Explanation. This necessarily implies that they think that Science has obtained all the knowledge that it will ever obtain. But this is not the Science that I know. I have been taught and expect that Science is discovering New Phenomena all the time. Here are the three statements that annoy the Physicalists to the point of mental breakdown:

1) Science has Zero, I repeat Zero, understanding with regard to Consciousness.

2) Conscious Experiences are in a whole different Category of Phenomena than any known Scientific Category of Phenomena.

3) The Conscious Experience of Pain can give an Organism or Animal a statistical Evolutionary survival advantage that can affect the Evolution of that Organism or Animal.

As for the first statement, the Physicalists say things like: The Neural Activity IS the Conscious Activity and then they say that Explains it, end of discussion. This is Naive and Shallow beyond all reasonableness. It isn't even a good Scientific guess. It is Pure Belief. It's so bad I have to think the Physicalists are not really serious when they say things like this but are just messing with me. They think that Measuring Neural Activity IS the same thing as Measuring the Conscious Activity. They are Measuring the Neural Correlates of Conscious Experience not the Conscious Experience itself. They treat the actual Conscious Experience as if it did not even exist. I can not understand how they get to this point in their Physicalist delirium. To perpetuate the Physicalist Belief they must Deny the actual existence of the Conscious Experience. The Conscious Experience of something like the Redness of Red is a Self Evident reality of the Universe, and they deny it. The Conscious Experience of Redness is something that Science cannot Explain. The Self evident reality of it is that it exists only in the Mind. They know the Redness exists in the Mind because they See it too but still they must deny this Self Evident Phenomenon of Consciousness because if it did exist Science would have to Explain it. But Science cannot Explain it at this point in time.

The second statement points out how the Physicalists might come to understand that Science doesn't have any Knowledge of what Conscious Experience could be. If Conscious Experience could be found to be in any known Category of Scientific Phenomena then Science would have had a lot to say about Consciousness by now. Instead we get Silence. Conscious Experience is in a Category all by itself and this new Category of Phenomena has not been integrated into the Scientific knowledge base yet. Science does not know what to do with this Category of Phenomena. Since Science does not know what to do with this Category of Conscious Phenomena the Physicalists say it is Supernatural or Religious. It's neither of these, it's simply not understood yet. Don't be afraid you little Physicalists, those scary Conscious Experiences will not hurt you.

I think the third statement is completely sensible from even the most basic understanding of Evolutionary mechanisms. The Physicalists completely oppose this statement however. I don't know how they can justify thinking that the Conscious Experience of Pain will not actually increase the statistical Evolutionary survival advantage for an Organism or Animal and thus influence Evolutionary outcomes. And it is not just Pain but all the multitudes of other Conscious Experiences that exist in the Universe. It is a logical conclusion to state that even primitive Consciousness can influence Evolution. Evolution is not a completely Mindless, Bio Electrical Chemical, DNA Mutating, Environmentally Influenced process. Rather, Evolution is driven by a combination of primitive Conscious Desires, Bio Electrical Chemical processes, Random DNA Mutations, and Environmental Influences. I suppose the opposition to this is because it admits the existence of Conscious Experience which they Deny. So because they have to Deny Conscious Experience they must Deny a basic premise of Evolution. They say that Evolutionary literature does not mention Conscious Experience so therefore the Conscious Experience of Pain cannot influence Evolutionary outcomes. This takes Shallow thinking and fear of what's outside the Box to extremes. I'll go so far as to say that if Evolutionary literature does not take into account Conscious Experience then Evolutionary literature needs a Big Update.
As pertains statement 1, does anyone (theologists, yogis, philosophers, paranormal experts etc) understand anything about consciousness?
"As usual... it depends."
Gee
Posts: 667
Joined: December 28th, 2012, 2:41 am
Location: Michigan, US

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by Gee »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 11:39 am A Physicalist is a Physical Monist or Material Monist. They Believe that all Conscious Phenomena can be explained by Physical Material Phenomena. Some Physicalists go so far as to discount Conscious Phenomena as even Existing at all. The Physicalists have complained about three basic statements that I have made. They seem to show an emotionalism in their replies that reveals a hidden frustration with their inability to address the statements in any coherent way. They are getting more and more Delirious. They are self appointed Guardians of the knowledge base of Science but that knowledge base is empty with regard to questions about Consciousness. They will not admit that there is Zero Scientific understanding of Consciousness so they resort to Insults and other Diversionary tactics that only reveal their ignorance. If Science cannot deal with Something then that Something can only be Supernatural or Religious in their way of thinking. They therefore need to make that Something go away rather than trying to study it more and come up with a Scientific Explanation. This necessarily implies that they think that Science has obtained all the knowledge that it will ever obtain. But this is not the Science that I know. I have been taught and expect that Science is discovering New Phenomena all the time. Here are the three statements that annoy the Physicalists to the point of mental breakdown:

1) Science has Zero, I repeat Zero, understanding with regard to Consciousness.

2) Conscious Experiences are in a whole different Category of Phenomena than any known Scientific Category of Phenomena.

3) The Conscious Experience of Pain can give an Organism or Animal a statistical Evolutionary survival advantage that can affect the Evolution of that Organism or Animal.
It is not often that I read a post in this forum and smile, but your post actually had me chuckling. I agree that the "self appointed Guardians of the knowledge base of Science" are delirious and getting worse. They dismiss or accept information based on belief. Science is becoming a faith based study, which will stop it from being science.
SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 11:39 am It is a logical conclusion to state that even primitive Consciousness can influence Evolution. Evolution is not a completely Mindless, Bio Electrical Chemical, DNA Mutating, Environmentally Influenced process. Rather, Evolution is driven by a combination of primitive Conscious Desires, Bio Electrical Chemical processes, Random DNA Mutations, and Environmental Influences. I suppose the opposition to this is because it admits the existence of Conscious Experience which they Deny. So because they have to Deny Conscious Experience they must Deny a basic premise of Evolution. They say that Evolutionary literature does not mention Conscious Experience so therefore the Conscious Experience of Pain cannot influence Evolutionary outcomes. This takes Shallow thinking and fear of what's outside the Box to extremes. I'll go so far as to say that if Evolutionary literature does not take into account Conscious Experience then Evolutionary literature needs a Big Update.
They are afraid of religion -- it is the only thing that makes any sense. I wrote a thread in a science forum that showed a viable path between consciousness and evolution that worked through emotion and chemistry, specifically hormones. They could not disprove my facts because they were valid, but neither would they accept my conclusions. It will be up to philosophy to solve these questions.

Gee
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko »

Consul wrote: May 6th, 2022, 2:19 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 1:13 pmI agree with what you are saying, but there are many of these Physicalists that will say Consciousness IS the Neurons, and will argue for years that I'm just not understanding the Deep and Profound meaning of their statement.
What reductive physicalists are saying is that the (constitutive) neural mechanisms of experiences are identical with the experiences. To have an experience is to have some neural mechanism implemented in one's brain which is (identical with) the experience. Of course, there are things to explain: What makes the general difference between an experiential neural mechanism and a nonexperiential one? What makes the specific difference between this experiential neural mechanism and that experiential one?
Yes, that is what they are saying, but there is no Scientific reason to say this. They are Guessing and proclaiming that their Guess is a Scientific principle.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko »

Consul wrote: May 6th, 2022, 2:27 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 1:21 pmWhether the Physicalist Identity Theory is true or whether the Connectist Connection Theory is true, will be decided Scientifically and with good Reasoning and Chains of Logic after some period of time with more Research. Right now the Identity Theory has no basis in any kind of Science. It is merely a Guess. The Connectist Theory is also a Guess right now. However, I like my Guess better than yours.
Call it a "guess", but reductive materialism about consciousness is by far the best, most promising guess. Dualism has no explanatory advantage at all—on the contrary, scientifically it's a dead end.
I have gone back to Dualism because Physicalist Identity Theory is the greater Dead End. I would say that Identity Theory or Reductive Materialism has no Explanatory advantage over Connectism. This would have to be an Embarrassing realization for the cocksure Physicalists.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko »

LuckyR wrote: May 6th, 2022, 3:18 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 11:39 am A Physicalist is a Physical Monist or Material Monist. They Believe that all Conscious Phenomena can be explained by Physical Material Phenomena. Some Physicalists go so far as to discount Conscious Phenomena as even Existing at all. The Physicalists have complained about three basic statements that I have made. They seem to show an emotionalism in their replies that reveals a hidden frustration with their inability to address the statements in any coherent way. They are getting more and more Delirious. They are self appointed Guardians of the knowledge base of Science but that knowledge base is empty with regard to questions about Consciousness. They will not admit that there is Zero Scientific understanding of Consciousness so they resort to Insults and other Diversionary tactics that only reveal their ignorance. If Science cannot deal with Something then that Something can only be Supernatural or Religious in their way of thinking. They therefore need to make that Something go away rather than trying to study it more and come up with a Scientific Explanation. This necessarily implies that they think that Science has obtained all the knowledge that it will ever obtain. But this is not the Science that I know. I have been taught and expect that Science is discovering New Phenomena all the time. Here are the three statements that annoy the Physicalists to the point of mental breakdown:

1) Science has Zero, I repeat Zero, understanding with regard to Consciousness.

2) Conscious Experiences are in a whole different Category of Phenomena than any known Scientific Category of Phenomena.

3) The Conscious Experience of Pain can give an Organism or Animal a statistical Evolutionary survival advantage that can affect the Evolution of that Organism or Animal.

As for the first statement, the Physicalists say things like: The Neural Activity IS the Conscious Activity and then they say that Explains it, end of discussion. This is Naive and Shallow beyond all reasonableness. It isn't even a good Scientific guess. It is Pure Belief. It's so bad I have to think the Physicalists are not really serious when they say things like this but are just messing with me. They think that Measuring Neural Activity IS the same thing as Measuring the Conscious Activity. They are Measuring the Neural Correlates of Conscious Experience not the Conscious Experience itself. They treat the actual Conscious Experience as if it did not even exist. I can not understand how they get to this point in their Physicalist delirium. To perpetuate the Physicalist Belief they must Deny the actual existence of the Conscious Experience. The Conscious Experience of something like the Redness of Red is a Self Evident reality of the Universe, and they deny it. The Conscious Experience of Redness is something that Science cannot Explain. The Self evident reality of it is that it exists only in the Mind. They know the Redness exists in the Mind because they See it too but still they must deny this Self Evident Phenomenon of Consciousness because if it did exist Science would have to Explain it. But Science cannot Explain it at this point in time.

The second statement points out how the Physicalists might come to understand that Science doesn't have any Knowledge of what Conscious Experience could be. If Conscious Experience could be found to be in any known Category of Scientific Phenomena then Science would have had a lot to say about Consciousness by now. Instead we get Silence. Conscious Experience is in a Category all by itself and this new Category of Phenomena has not been integrated into the Scientific knowledge base yet. Science does not know what to do with this Category of Phenomena. Since Science does not know what to do with this Category of Conscious Phenomena the Physicalists say it is Supernatural or Religious. It's neither of these, it's simply not understood yet. Don't be afraid you little Physicalists, those scary Conscious Experiences will not hurt you.

I think the third statement is completely sensible from even the most basic understanding of Evolutionary mechanisms. The Physicalists completely oppose this statement however. I don't know how they can justify thinking that the Conscious Experience of Pain will not actually increase the statistical Evolutionary survival advantage for an Organism or Animal and thus influence Evolutionary outcomes. And it is not just Pain but all the multitudes of other Conscious Experiences that exist in the Universe. It is a logical conclusion to state that even primitive Consciousness can influence Evolution. Evolution is not a completely Mindless, Bio Electrical Chemical, DNA Mutating, Environmentally Influenced process. Rather, Evolution is driven by a combination of primitive Conscious Desires, Bio Electrical Chemical processes, Random DNA Mutations, and Environmental Influences. I suppose the opposition to this is because it admits the existence of Conscious Experience which they Deny. So because they have to Deny Conscious Experience they must Deny a basic premise of Evolution. They say that Evolutionary literature does not mention Conscious Experience so therefore the Conscious Experience of Pain cannot influence Evolutionary outcomes. This takes Shallow thinking and fear of what's outside the Box to extremes. I'll go so far as to say that if Evolutionary literature does not take into account Conscious Experience then Evolutionary literature needs a Big Update.
As pertains statement 1, does anyone (theologists, yogis, philosophers, paranormal experts etc) understand anything about consciousness?
Nobody knows anything about Consciousness. Science has Zero Explanation for Consciousness, but many Scientists claim that the problem of Consciousness is solved.
stevie
Posts: 762
Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by stevie »

Definition of delirium

1 : an acute (see acute sense 1a(2)) mental disturbance characterized by confused thinking and disrupted attention usually accompanied by disordered speech and hallucinations
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/delirium

It seems the expression "delirium" is based on an [anti-physicalist] dualistic circularity here in this context. But since matter is doing the speaking and writing, "delirium" - given the definition - should be excluded from the set of [neuro-]scientifically appropriate verbal expressions.
mankind ... must act and reason and believe; though they are not able, by their most diligent enquiry, to satisfy themselves concerning the foundation of these operations, or to remove the objections, which may be raised against them [Hume]
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko »

Gee wrote: May 7th, 2022, 1:57 am
SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 11:39 am A Physicalist is a Physical Monist or Material Monist. They Believe that all Conscious Phenomena can be explained by Physical Material Phenomena. Some Physicalists go so far as to discount Conscious Phenomena as even Existing at all. The Physicalists have complained about three basic statements that I have made. They seem to show an emotionalism in their replies that reveals a hidden frustration with their inability to address the statements in any coherent way. They are getting more and more Delirious. They are self appointed Guardians of the knowledge base of Science but that knowledge base is empty with regard to questions about Consciousness. They will not admit that there is Zero Scientific understanding of Consciousness so they resort to Insults and other Diversionary tactics that only reveal their ignorance. If Science cannot deal with Something then that Something can only be Supernatural or Religious in their way of thinking. They therefore need to make that Something go away rather than trying to study it more and come up with a Scientific Explanation. This necessarily implies that they think that Science has obtained all the knowledge that it will ever obtain. But this is not the Science that I know. I have been taught and expect that Science is discovering New Phenomena all the time. Here are the three statements that annoy the Physicalists to the point of mental breakdown:

1) Science has Zero, I repeat Zero, understanding with regard to Consciousness.

2) Conscious Experiences are in a whole different Category of Phenomena than any known Scientific Category of Phenomena.

3) The Conscious Experience of Pain can give an Organism or Animal a statistical Evolutionary survival advantage that can affect the Evolution of that Organism or Animal.
It is not often that I read a post in this forum and smile, but your post actually had me chuckling. I agree that the "self appointed Guardians of the knowledge base of Science" are delirious and getting worse. They dismiss or accept information based on belief. Science is becoming a faith based study, which will stop it from being science.
SteveKlinko wrote: May 6th, 2022, 11:39 am It is a logical conclusion to state that even primitive Consciousness can influence Evolution. Evolution is not a completely Mindless, Bio Electrical Chemical, DNA Mutating, Environmentally Influenced process. Rather, Evolution is driven by a combination of primitive Conscious Desires, Bio Electrical Chemical processes, Random DNA Mutations, and Environmental Influences. I suppose the opposition to this is because it admits the existence of Conscious Experience which they Deny. So because they have to Deny Conscious Experience they must Deny a basic premise of Evolution. They say that Evolutionary literature does not mention Conscious Experience so therefore the Conscious Experience of Pain cannot influence Evolutionary outcomes. This takes Shallow thinking and fear of what's outside the Box to extremes. I'll go so far as to say that if Evolutionary literature does not take into account Conscious Experience then Evolutionary literature needs a Big Update.
They are afraid of religion -- it is the only thing that makes any sense. I wrote a thread in a science forum that showed a viable path between consciousness and evolution that worked through emotion and chemistry, specifically hormones. They could not disprove my facts because they were valid, but neither would they accept my conclusions. It will be up to philosophy to solve these questions.

Gee
Thank you for the good feedback. You should continue to press your theories on Evolution and Consciousness. I think there has been a Dereliction of Duty by Scientists when it comes to Consciousness and Evolution.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Addressing The Physicalist Delirium

Post by SteveKlinko »

stevie wrote: May 7th, 2022, 8:24 am
Definition of delirium

1 : an acute (see acute sense 1a(2)) mental disturbance characterized by confused thinking and disrupted attention usually accompanied by disordered speech and hallucinations
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/delirium

It seems the expression "delirium" is based on an [anti-physicalist] dualistic circularity here in this context. But since matter is doing the speaking and writing, "delirium" - given the definition - should be excluded from the set of [neuro-]scientifically appropriate verbal expressions.
Hmmm ... Hahhhh ... Exactly!
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