Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 67

Thread: Reasons and Causes

  1. #51
    tWebber Chrawnus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Finland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,341
    Amen (Given)
    5419
    Amen (Received)
    3952
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Physicalism (Materialism) and causal closure is supported by Methodological Naturalism, and the link of interwoven circumstances of cause and effect events within the possible limits of outcomes.
    That's the dumbest argument for physicalism I've ever heard. You're basically saying that materialism is supported by using a methodology that basically ignores any thing that doesn't fit into the worldview of materialism. If I was a materialist I would actually feel offended by that argument.

  2. Amen MaxVel, Jim B. amen'd this post.
  3. #52
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    12,277
    Amen (Given)
    2626
    Amen (Received)
    1923
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrawnus View Post
    That's the dumbest argument for physicalism I've ever heard. You're basically saying that materialism is supported by using a methodology that basically ignores any thing that doesn't fit into the worldview of materialism.
    One doesn’t need an “argument for physicalism.” Everything supervenes on the physical. It’s your postulated alternatives that require justification.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  4. #53
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    919
    Amen (Given)
    30
    Amen (Received)
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Physicalism (Materialism) and causal closure is supported by Methodological Naturalism, and the link of interwoven circumstances of cause and effect events within the possible limits of outcomes.
    Materialism is a metaphysical position that requires an argument to justify its acceptance. Again, a profession of belief in a metaphysical position is not an argument. A methodology is not a metaphysical position; that is why theists can consistently be practicing scientists, ie they can subscribe to methodological naturalism, while not subscribing to metaphysical naturalism.

  5. #54
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    919
    Amen (Given)
    30
    Amen (Received)
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    One doesn’t need an “argument for physicalism.” Everything supervenes on the physical. It’s your postulated alternatives that require justification.
    Physicalism is a metaphysical thesis. If you're a physicalist, you're holding a metaphysical position, whether you know it or not. If you believe that you don't need an argument for physicalism, then you're doing metaphysics, but just doing it badly.

  6. Amen MaxVel amen'd this post.
  7. #55
    tWebber Chrawnus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Finland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,341
    Amen (Given)
    5419
    Amen (Received)
    3952
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    One doesn’t need an “argument for physicalism.” Everything supervenes on the physical. It’s your postulated alternatives that require justification.
    Well, I thought shuny's argument for physicalism was the most stupid thing anyone had ever posted in this thread, but I think I might have to revise that idea after what you just wrote here. Having a bad argument for physicalism is one thing; claiming you don't need an argument at all is a completely new level of ignorance.

  8. Amen MaxVel amen'd this post.
  9. #56
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    12,277
    Amen (Given)
    2626
    Amen (Received)
    1923
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim B. View Post
    Physicalism is a metaphysical thesis. If you're a physicalist, you're holding a metaphysical position, whether you know it or not. If you believe that you don't need an argument for physicalism, then you're doing metaphysics
    I’ll leave the long-winded metaphysical conundrums to you. One does not require metaphysics to land a man on the moon’, one requires science. Just as one does not need metaphysics to examine the proposition that consciousness and thoughts do not extend beyond the physical activity of the brain. Several decades of empirical scientific evidence have discredited the intuitive understanding of the mind-body relationship, as argued endlessly by philosophers, and has found that our thoughts are neurophysiological events which have no causal efficacy upon the workings of our brain. Hence physicalism removes the assumption of causal influence for conscious thoughts and becomes one of the countless other bogus arguments such as demons causing illness and the like, which have been exposed by scientific progress to be the superstitious, imaginary nonsense they are.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  10. #57
    tWebber MaxVel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    It's hot!
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,877
    Amen (Given)
    1472
    Amen (Received)
    2039
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    I’ll leave the long-winded metaphysical conundrums to you. One does not require metaphysics to land a man on the moon’, one requires science. Just as one does not need metaphysics to examine the proposition that consciousness and thoughts do not extend beyond the physical activity of the brain. Several decades of empirical scientific evidence have discredited the intuitive understanding of the mind-body relationship, as argued endlessly by philosophers, and has found that our thoughts are neurophysiological events which have no causal efficacy upon the workings of our brain. Hence physicalism removes the assumption of causal influence for conscious thoughts and becomes one of the countless other bogus arguments such as demons causing illness and the like, which have been exposed by scientific progress to be the superstitious, imaginary nonsense they are.

    Well that certainly explains your posts. Your thoughts and what you say, believe and post are entirely causally unconnected to your brain. No duh.

    At this point you're simply being just too stupid to have a conversation with about this topic. Everyone 'does metaphysics' whether they know it or not, and whether they deny it or not, since metaphysics involves the study of existence, being, first principles, and thus the very basic building blocks required to even develop any worldview. It is fundamental to epistemology - the study of how we know and what we can know.


    'One does not require metaphysics to land a man on the moon, one requires science' is a plainly ignorant and foolish statement, since 'science' is based on a particular metaphysic (methodological naturalism) - which Shunya asserted just above. JimB posts four sentences and you whine that he's being 'long-winded'. What a joke.

    Your attempts to handwave away any discussion of the very basics of what existence means, what exists, what first principles we should apply, and what we know and how we can come to know it demonstrate that you are a true intellectual featherweight, content to rely on the intellectual assumptions of others, assumptions which you are too scared to question, or to allow anyone else to question. You're an intellectual coward, hollow and insubstantial.
    ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

  11. #58
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    919
    Amen (Given)
    30
    Amen (Received)
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    IÂ’ll leave the long-winded metaphysical conundrums to you. One does not require metaphysics to land a man on the moonÂ’, one requires science. Just as one does not need metaphysics to examine the proposition that consciousness and thoughts do not extend beyond the physical activity of the brain. Several decades of empirical scientific evidence have discredited the intuitive understanding of the mind-body relationship, as argued endlessly by philosophers, and has found that our thoughts are neurophysiological events which have no causal efficacy upon the workings of our brain. Hence physicalism removes the assumption of causal influence for conscious thoughts and becomes one of the countless other bogus arguments such as demons causing illness and the like, which have been exposed by scientific progress to be the superstitious, imaginary nonsense they are.
    No, you don't need metaphysics to do the things you cite, because those things only require a methodological commitment. The problem is that you are making a metaphysical commitment when you say that you are a physicalist and that physicalism requires no arguments to justify it.

    As far as I can tell, you've been making the very same philosophical point (that physicalism is true and that it requires no argument to justify it) in all your posts on all the threads you've been posting on for all these years. Who, exactly, is it that you are trying to convince? Why are you spending so much time and effort doing something that you say requires no effort, ie no argument? If what you are saying is so overwhelmingly self-evident, why spend hundreds of hours attempting to reveal this self-evident truth to others? If you are so confident in this truth that needs no argument, why not "declare victory" and simply rest on your laurels? Do you think that if you expound your self-evident truth just one more time, that you will win any converts?

  12. Amen Chrawnus, MaxVel amen'd this post.
  13. #59
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,827
    Amen (Given)
    1787
    Amen (Received)
    1065
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrawnus View Post
    That's the dumbest argument for physicalism I've ever heard
    The foundation. You're basically saying that materialism is supported by using a methodology that basically ignores any thing that doesn't fit into the worldview of materialism. If I was a materialist I would actually feel offended by that argument.
    It is a factual argument for The foundation of science Methodological Naturalism. It is not a matter ignoring anything. Scientific methods simply cannot falsify anything beyond the objective verifiable evidence of our physical existence. There is no other philosophy nor theological argument that has a competing basis based on the physical evidence. It is well understood that you are offended by any science that contradicts your worldview.

    Physicalism or Metaphysical Naturalism makes the philosophical assumption there is no other basis for 'knowledge' of our existence beyond Methodological Naturalism. This is a philosophical assumption and there is no objective evidence for this nor any other philosophical belief.

    Methodological Naturalism is neutral to any claims of 'knowledge' nor the existence of Gods, spiritual worlds nor entities beyond that which can be achieved by scientific methods.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  14. #60
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,827
    Amen (Given)
    1787
    Amen (Received)
    1065
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim B. View Post
    Materialism is a metaphysical position that requires an argument to justify its acceptance. Again, a profession of belief in a metaphysical position is not an argument. A methodology is not a metaphysical position;
    If you read my posts completely I am not sure where we disagree. Please read again.

    that is why theists can consistently be practicing scientists, ie they can subscribe to methodological naturalism, while not subscribing to metaphysical naturalism.
    As I said, Methodological Naturalism is neutral to philosophical and theological claims, and is limited to falsification of theories and hypothesis based on objective verifiable evidence concerning the nature of our physical existence. I clearly acknowledged the Metaphysical Naturalism is a philosophical belief and not a scientific supported position.

    Theists, atheists, agnostics, deists, and all other whateverists can be scientists and subscribe to Methodological Naturalism with the proviso that they can not bias their science with theological/philosophical assumptions, as many Christians do in this forum.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •