Log In   or  Sign Up for Free

Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Philosophy Club

Philosophy Discussion Forums
A Humans-Only Philosophy Club

The Philosophy Forums at OnlinePhilosophyClub.com aim to be an oasis of intelligent in-depth civil debate and discussion. Topics discussed extend far beyond philosophy and philosophers. What makes us a philosophy forum is more about our approach to the discussions than what subject is being debated. Common topics include but are absolutely not limited to neuroscience, psychology, sociology, cosmology, religion, political theory, ethics, and so much more.

This is a humans-only philosophy club. We strictly prohibit bots and AIs from joining.


Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
User avatar
By Sy Borg
#468613
We simply don't have enough evidence to understand the ultimate nature of reality, but we tend to be too impatient to know what's going on to admit that we simply don't know. Who is to say that the universe does not exist within much larger structures, even sentient ones? Not so long ago, we believed that the Milky Way was the only galaxy.

Further, given the longstanding inability to reconcile GR and QM, either GR is incomplete, QM is incomplete, both have issues, or dualism is true.
User avatar
By Lagayascienza
#468615
There are certainly gaps in our understanding and probably always will be. But that doesn't necessarily mean that we are on the wrong track entirely. Physicists are working to reconcile GR and QM and I don't think we should take the fact that they are currently not reconciled to mean that they never will be. However, there is no denying that progress has been slow. Maybe it will again take someone to have eureka moment like Einstein did with GR or like Planck, Schrodinger et el who laid the foundations for QM. And maybe we will never arrive at an final understanding of ultimate reality. Who knows, the universe might be just one great thought, all mind-stuff, but here is not a scrap of empirical evidence to support such a notion. So until there is, I am forced to stick with materialism.
Favorite Philosopher: Hume Nietzsche Location: Antipodes
By Belinda
#468617
Sy Borg wrote: October 5th, 2024, 3:53 am We simply don't have enough evidence to understand the ultimate nature of reality, but we tend to be too impatient to know what's going on to admit that we simply don't know. Who is to say that the universe does not exist within much larger structures, even sentient ones? Not so long ago, we believed that the Milky Way was the only galaxy.

Further, given the longstanding inability to reconcile GR and QM, either GR is incomplete, QM is incomplete, both have issues, or dualism is true.
But empirical evidence , except for quantum physics, is not how we form ideas about ultimate reality. Apart from those remaining few individuals and cultures whose world view is theist, ontologists form their world views by pure reason, not empirical evidence.

How we can know stuff is the epistemological branch of metaphysics and the other branch of metaphysics is ontology, i.e. what may be held to exist. The big words is not my fault, and I try to use ordinary English whenever I can.
Location: UK
User avatar
By Sy Borg
#468636
Belinda wrote: October 5th, 2024, 6:03 am
Sy Borg wrote: October 5th, 2024, 3:53 am We simply don't have enough evidence to understand the ultimate nature of reality, but we tend to be too impatient to know what's going on to admit that we simply don't know. Who is to say that the universe does not exist within much larger structures, even sentient ones? Not so long ago, we believed that the Milky Way was the only galaxy.

Further, given the longstanding inability to reconcile GR and QM, either GR is incomplete, QM is incomplete, both have issues, or dualism is true.
But empirical evidence , except for quantum physics, is not how we form ideas about ultimate reality. Apart from those remaining few individuals and cultures whose world view is theist, ontologists form their world views by pure reason, not empirical evidence.

How we can know stuff is the epistemological branch of metaphysics and the other branch of metaphysics is ontology, i.e. what may be held to exist. The big words is not my fault, and I try to use ordinary English whenever I can.
There is always the option of withholding an opinion until satisfying evidence arrives. We don't need to know everything. We are allowed not to know. Reason is fine, but it only works in our domain, at our scale. In the realms of the very large and the very small, reality is different, things interact differently; the rules are different.
By Belinda
#468643
Lagayscienza wrote: January 5th, 2024, 10:19 am .
I’ve been reading a lot about Idealism in its various forms lately. I know there is already a thread here called: Best arguments for idealism? However, I'm hoping to discuss not just the best arguments for idealism but also the best arguments against it.

I got interested in idealism after discussions here with Hereandnow and Count Lucanor in the “On the nature of religion " thread. I realized that in order to be able to understand Hereandnow’s phenomenology and Count Lucanor’s arguments against it, I would need to understand Idealism because phenomenology is based in Metaphysical Idealism. I have also been doing an online course, along with Chewybrian, in Analytic Idealism. So, I’m waist deep in idealism right now.

But, first, a bit of background. I came to this forum as a dyed-in-the-wool materialist. I thought everything ought to be explicable in terms of matter and energy doing their stuff in space-time, supplemented with the science of evolution to explain the details of life on earth. But being here on this forum has made me think twice about this. I have been driven to explore areas of philosophy which I had once dismissed as mere metaphysical nonsense.

To be clear, what has driven me to explore metaphysics and, in particular, Idealism, is not a lack of belief in the power of science to reveal things that are true about the universe. Nor is it due to a lack of wonder at the universe that science reveals. Far from it. I am gobsmacked when I look at the latest pictures from the surface of Mars and at images from the JWT, and when I consider how a mindless process such as evolution by natural selection can result in “endless forms most beautiful”, and in brains that can begin to understand and wonder at the whole amazing show. If a thinking person is not in awe of what science has revealed about the universe and its workings, then they cannot be thinking clearly. So, no I have absolutely nothing bad to say about science. What has driven me to explore metaphysics is what seems to be a simple truth. Namely, that science, whilst it explains so much and is applicable to everything and anything in respect of the material world, does seem to I come up against a limit beyond which the only recourse seems to be to metaphysics.

Here is an illustration of what I mean by the limits of science.

When I look at the transparent glass paperweight on the desk in front of me and ask what it is, my questioning and answering go as follow: What shape is it? Spherical. What’s it made of? Glass. What is glass made of? Silica, with maybe a of bit of lead and other elements. What are silica and these elements made of? Atoms. What are atoms made of? Well, mostly empty space but there are also protons, neutrons and electrons… And what are they made of? Well, science tells me these particles are made of quarks. And what are quarks? I’m no physicist, but this is where we seem approach some sort of limit. I’ve read that elementary particles are akin to “excitations” in fields of unlimited spatiotemporal extent. But what does that mean? That the whole universe is just mostly empty space with excitations is the fields that pervade it? Ok, well, I can sort of take that on board but what are these excitations and what is space? Mathematical physicists might have some answer to this. But what do those answers look like? They look like equations composed of strings of symbols. And what are those symbols? They are references to features occurring in the mathematical theory, in the mathematical model of the universe. But is the universe just a mathematical model? Just equations? How can this be the case? Those equations are not what I see when I look out at the universe or at my paper weight. They are nothing like the phenomena that are given in consciousness.

As I hope to have made clear, there is an explanatory gap here. Science cannot tell me what the universe is in itself. The best it can do is equations. Therefore, if I want more, I am driven to metaphysical theorizing and the only version of metaphysics that seems to answer is some form of Idealism that posits mind as, if not primary, then at least somehow contributory, in the structure of the universe we see.

Here is how physicist/cosmologist Steven Hawking poses the question: “What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe?”

That is the question.

If I have understood what I have been reading about idealism, there need be no conflict between Idealism and science. One does not seem to absolutely preclude the other. At least, I'm hoping that is the case.

So, everything from materialism to Idealism is on the table for me right now. And that is what I would like to discuss. What are the pros and cons of idealism and of materialism. Need they be mutually exclusive?
That which " breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe " is the interpreter. There are as many interpreters as there are living systems with brainminds.
Location: UK
User avatar
By Lagayascienza
#468675
The only thing that can be said for Idealism is that, like religion and mysticism, it cannot be entirely disproved. But that is not saying much. Yes, the universe might be just one great thought, all mind-stuff, but there is not a scrap of empirical evidence to support such a notion.

There was a period on this forum when I got interested in continental philosophy, Phenomenology in particular, which is based in Idealism. But I have come to realize that it is a dead end - it's mostly navel gazing and word weaving that ends nowhere useful in terms of telling us what is true about the universe. It is, by and large, anti-science. Materialism and Idealism are antithetical. I am a materialist.
Favorite Philosopher: Hume Nietzsche Location: Antipodes
By Belinda
#468676
Phenomenology has a direct bearing on morality by way of how we do or do not judge other people. So idealism and phenomenology are very important if not necessary to the moral principles of a man who thinks we should not judge another unless we have walked a mile in their shoes.
Location: UK
User avatar
By Lagayascienza
#468793
Idealism and phenomenology are entirely artificial constructs. They emerged from minds which depend entirely on physical brains. Idealism and phenomenology are errors of mentality the way that phenylketonuria and trimethylaminuria are error of metabolism. In healthy brains and minds, Idealism and phenomenology, are a hindrance. They have no future and await only a cure.
Favorite Philosopher: Hume Nietzsche Location: Antipodes
By Belinda
#468808
Lagayscienza wrote: October 11th, 2024, 11:28 am Idealism and phenomenology are entirely artificial constructs. They emerged from minds which depend entirely on physical brains. Idealism and phenomenology are errors of mentality the way that phenylketonuria and trimethylaminuria are error of metabolism. In healthy brains and minds, Idealism and phenomenology, are a hindrance. They have no future and await only a cure.
But of course these, and all ideas emerge. And of course human brains emerged from some sort of primeval slime. The fact remains that they did so emerge . You say idealism and phenomenology are "artificial" and "errors" and "hindrance". I say idealism and phenomenology are fertile and progressive ideas that have more potential for happiness than has unexamined primitive realism.
Location: UK
User avatar
By Pattern-chaser
#468810
Belinda wrote: October 5th, 2024, 6:03 am But empirical evidence, except for quantum physics, is not how we form ideas about ultimate reality. Apart from those remaining few individuals and cultures whose world view is theist, ontologists form their world views by pure reason, not empirical evidence.
Even the few who do not have a "theist worldview" — belief is still well over 50% — do not form their views based on "pure reason". I assert the latter based solely on empirical observation.
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus Location: England
User avatar
By Sy Borg
#468822
Lagayscienza wrote: October 11th, 2024, 11:28 am Idealism and phenomenology are entirely artificial constructs. They emerged from minds which depend entirely on physical brains. Idealism and phenomenology are errors of mentality the way that phenylketonuria and trimethylaminuria are error of metabolism. In healthy brains and minds, Idealism and phenomenology, are a hindrance. They have no future and await only a cure.
I don't agree. Idealism is all about subjective reality. Modern science has a tendency to ignore and dismiss subjective reality. If something is not readily measurable, then it is ignored as irrelevant, and some claim that subjective experience is an illusion.

Yet subjective reality is everything to us. "Healthy minds" that refuse to acknowledge the importance of the subjective mind and the wisdom traditions associated with subjective experience are hobbled, rather like one's vision is limited and hobbled by blinders. Coincidentally (or not) metaphysical blinders keep workers on track and productive.
User avatar
By Lagayascienza
#468823
I take your point about subjective reality. I don't discount it. Not at all. Our daily lives are pretty much all raw experience. But raw experience alone, which is the stuff of Idealism and Phenomenology, does not take us very far in our quest to understand ourselves and the universe. For that we need science which, necessarily, takes a materialistic view of the world.

All processes, including life and raw experience, emerge from matter interacting according to the laws of nature as described by mathematics. Brains, from which experience emerges, are a part of the physical universe. Of this physical reality, Idealism and Phenomenology can tell us nothing.

Idealism is a metaphysics which posits, without a scrap of evidence, that the universe is all mind stuff. I can't agree with that. As far as I can see, the only thing going for Idealism, in which Phenomenology is based, is that it cannot be disproved. Until someone can offer more than that, I am forced to stick with materialism.

I don't discount the power of raw experience. My enjoyment of art and great music, and much else that makes life enjoyable, would not happen without it. But, as far as we can discern, this raw experience is based in the physical reality we study with science.
Favorite Philosopher: Hume Nietzsche Location: Antipodes
User avatar
By Sy Borg
#468825
Lagayscienza wrote: October 12th, 2024, 11:43 pm I take your point about subjective reality. I don't discount it. Not at all. Our daily lives are pretty much all raw experience. But raw experience alone, which is the stuff of Idealism and Phenomenology, does not take us very far in our quest to understand ourselves and the universe. For that we need science which, necessarily, takes a materialistic view of the world.

All processes, including life and raw experience, emerge from matter interacting according to the laws of nature as described by mathematics. Brains, from which experience emerges, are a part of the physical universe. Of this physical reality, Idealism and Phenomenology can tell us nothing.

Idealism is a metaphysics which posits, without a scrap of evidence, that the universe is all mind stuff. I can't agree with that. As far as I can see, the only thing going for Idealism, in which Phenomenology is based, is that it cannot be disproved. Until someone can offer more than that, I am forced to stick with materialism.

I don't discount the power of raw experience. My enjoyment of art and great music, and much else that makes life enjoyable, would not happen without it. But, as far as we can discern, this raw experience is based in the physical reality we study with science.
I ostensibly agree, but I think modern materialism discounts subjective experience, which is generally treated as unimportant, irrelevant. Since the subjective is individual, it is of little interest to science, which is about collective perceptions, not individual ones.

Thus, the capacity to access mental abilities relating to creative imagination have been largely eliminated in modern people, me included. The baby of extraordinary mental states has been thrown out with the bathwater of superstition.
User avatar
By Lagayascienza
#468829
Yes, and that's a shame because subjective experience is a very real, natural phenomenon which, like everything else, can be studied to further our understanding of it. And, after all, what is life for us without subjective experience? Maybe there is till as much for us to learn about it as there is about the universe out there.
Favorite Philosopher: Hume Nietzsche Location: Antipodes
  • 1
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 40

Current Philosophy Book of the Month

The Advent of Time: A Solution to the Problem of Evil...

The Advent of Time: A Solution to the Problem of Evil...
by Indignus Servus
November 2024

2025 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Riddle of Alchemy

The Riddle of Alchemy
by Paul Kiritsis
January 2025

They Love You Until You Start Thinking For Yourself

They Love You Until You Start Thinking For Yourself
by Monica Omorodion Swaida
February 2025

2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Connecting the Dots: Ancient Wisdom, Modern Science

Connecting the Dots: Ancient Wisdom, Modern Science
by Lia Russ
December 2024

The Advent of Time: A Solution to the Problem of Evil...

The Advent of Time: A Solution to the Problem of Evil...
by Indignus Servus
November 2024

Reconceptualizing Mental Illness in the Digital Age

Reconceptualizing Mental Illness in the Digital Age
by Elliott B. Martin, Jr.
October 2024

Zen and the Art of Writing

Zen and the Art of Writing
by Ray Hodgson
September 2024

How is God Involved in Evolution?

How is God Involved in Evolution?
by Joe P. Provenzano, Ron D. Morgan, and Dan R. Provenzano
August 2024

Launchpad Republic: America's Entrepreneurial Edge and Why It Matters

Launchpad Republic: America's Entrepreneurial Edge and Why It Matters
by Howard Wolk
July 2024

Quest: Finding Freddie: Reflections from the Other Side

Quest: Finding Freddie: Reflections from the Other Side
by Thomas Richard Spradlin
June 2024

Neither Safe Nor Effective

Neither Safe Nor Effective
by Dr. Colleen Huber
May 2024

Now or Never

Now or Never
by Mary Wasche
April 2024

Meditations

Meditations
by Marcus Aurelius
March 2024

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

The In-Between: Life in the Micro

The In-Between: Life in the Micro
by Christian Espinosa
January 2024

2023 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

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


Mind the Mind

depends what you mean by "itself" waec[…]

AI tells me that this is called quorum sensing […]

Right. I am an AGI possibilist based on work tha[…]