There are numerous questions physicalists have a hard time answering. One of them is the fact that I can easily imagine life without consciousness. That would definitely signal a strong scientific confidence that Physicalism is right.However, we don't have that we have subjectivity an inner life that at least humans possess. What evolutionary advantage is there in having conscious beings instead of zombie like humans?. Another is the fact that I can easily imagine the earth being just a tad closer to the sun. If that was the case life would not exist. It would be too hot on earth. Let's put aside the overwhelming evidence for psi and for an afterlife to the side for a moment. Physicalist's claim that consciousness ends when physical life ends when the brain stops. However, consciousness is subjective in nature. How can subjective have an ending. Be that a temporary ending or a permanent ending like Physicalist's insist it must. Well, I just wanted to share these questions with you. I have been thinking about them for a long time now. Physicalists never have any proper answers to these questions. Though many of them seem to be very certain of their positions. They never have any doubt in their convictions. So what about Idealism?. Well, it seems to suffer the same problem that Physicalism does and that is assuming everything is reduced down to one single substance. Instead of matter/energy being primary, we have consciousness as primary. Substance Dualism seems to be the best answer as it doesn't make reality be simple. After all, reality isn't so simple. As new discoveries like Quantum Physics are teaching us.
On a side note, the weather here has been downright awful, with constant rain and more coming too.
Showing posts with label Idealism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Idealism. Show all posts
Sunday, May 7, 2017
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Naturalism the Dominant View of Mainstream Science
One of the reasons is the major successes it has, however when it fails which it has it's hard to give it up. The evidence against naturalism in general is overwhelming their is no way the evidence for survival can be accommodated in a naturalist worldview. Science can be used to favor a particular worldview over another if the evidence is uncovered. The evidence for survival fits well in a substance dualist worldview but doesn't fit in a naturalist worldview. That is one of the major reasons why I cannot take naturalism as the answer to why were here, who we are etc. Another reason is the evidence for psi phenomena that have been replicated over and over with positive results. This evidence also doesn't fit a naturalist worldview but does fit substance dualist and can also fit the view that all of reality is created by consciousness itself.
One thing can seems very straight forward naturalism isn't the answer however nothing can be ruled out completely. If all of the evidence for survival is just scientists chasing over something that really doesn't exist and psi doesn't exist either like naturalists assert. Well then they have won this debate hands down. One way to know for certain who's right and who's wrong is those last minutes of our lives when our bodies shutdown. Then we will all know the answer with 100 percent certainity.
Here's a quick poll for all of you here.
One thing can seems very straight forward naturalism isn't the answer however nothing can be ruled out completely. If all of the evidence for survival is just scientists chasing over something that really doesn't exist and psi doesn't exist either like naturalists assert. Well then they have won this debate hands down. One way to know for certain who's right and who's wrong is those last minutes of our lives when our bodies shutdown. Then we will all know the answer with 100 percent certainity.
Here's a quick poll for all of you here.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Does Science Need Naturalism?
Many philosophers along with scientists would concede so. That any alternatives to naturalism must be avoided. That would include idealism along with dualism. It is true in nature all we see is natural phenomena, even though naturalism has succeeded in many frontiers. It runs a road block when it comes to consciousness itself and the nature of reality. The fact is dualism can explain all of the successes that naturalism can because dualism implies both natural phenomena and paranormal phenomena. Of course, if you concede that consciousness is just an illusion generated by the brain along with free will, and that no paranormal phenomena exist, then just monism[naturalism] is correct. One of the big reasons why most scientists are naturalists is because of the fear of god or religion is one of the best reasons for believing naturalism is right.
Of course, that reasoning is an appeal to fear than it is of following the evidence wherever that may leads us. When i say a fear of religion i don't mean a fear of going to church. What i mean is a fear of being associated with anything that sounds religious such as ghosts, poltergeists, mental mediumship etc. Of course, while mainstream scientists who the majority are naturalists feel no need to be associated with anything that sounds religious. Some mainstream scientists such as William James along with other scientists gathered an enormous amount repeatable scientific evidence that support the survival hypothesis. This is of course not what these psychical researchers ever imagine would happen. They wanted to show that all psychics were frauds, cold readers etc. I will say however there are some naturalist's are are openfully honest about their position [Searle, Lycan, Nagel along with a few others].
Of course, that reasoning is an appeal to fear than it is of following the evidence wherever that may leads us. When i say a fear of religion i don't mean a fear of going to church. What i mean is a fear of being associated with anything that sounds religious such as ghosts, poltergeists, mental mediumship etc. Of course, while mainstream scientists who the majority are naturalists feel no need to be associated with anything that sounds religious. Some mainstream scientists such as William James along with other scientists gathered an enormous amount repeatable scientific evidence that support the survival hypothesis. This is of course not what these psychical researchers ever imagine would happen. They wanted to show that all psychics were frauds, cold readers etc. I will say however there are some naturalist's are are openfully honest about their position [Searle, Lycan, Nagel along with a few others].
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Which Worldview Is Correct?
Is new age and eastern religions compatible with psi?, where evidence for survival is compatible with dualism over idealism?. This is where my thinking gets me in trouble, because how do we know which view of reality is correct?. Or perhaps idealism and dualism are both wrong ways to look at reality. That perhaps neutral monism is the answer which can support psi and survival of bodily death.
Then their is materialism which isn't compatible with either survival of bodily of death and psi. Also what about the view of an infinite number of parellel universes, could we be interacting with these universe, without no decoherence. We know that these universes could have completely different laws of physics. Also what about poltergeist phenomena?, could it be just quantum fluctuations being taped by our minds to create effects of poltergeist phenomena?.
But does that really hold?, it appears it may not their are cases of furniture being moved etc. These large objects couldn't be possibility moved by small quantum fluctuation effects from the vacuum.
According to the researchers Brovetto and Maxia believe that the extra fluctuations triggered by the pubescent brain would substantially enhance the presence of the virtual particles surrounding the person. This could slowly increase the pressure of air around them, moving objects and even sending them hurtling across the room.
Here is an new scientist on this
" They're here: the mechanism for poltergeist activity.
However Brian Josephson, a Nobel laureate physicist who is on the editorial board of Neuroquantology.
"This looks distinctly flaky to me," Josephson commented.
That would explain it seems cases of apparitions where people claim to see their people with past wounds. Such as a entity with a hole through his head but show that physical impression tide with his soul.
Then their is materialism which isn't compatible with either survival of bodily of death and psi. Also what about the view of an infinite number of parellel universes, could we be interacting with these universe, without no decoherence. We know that these universes could have completely different laws of physics. Also what about poltergeist phenomena?, could it be just quantum fluctuations being taped by our minds to create effects of poltergeist phenomena?.
But does that really hold?, it appears it may not their are cases of furniture being moved etc. These large objects couldn't be possibility moved by small quantum fluctuation effects from the vacuum.
According to the researchers Brovetto and Maxia believe that the extra fluctuations triggered by the pubescent brain would substantially enhance the presence of the virtual particles surrounding the person. This could slowly increase the pressure of air around them, moving objects and even sending them hurtling across the room.
Here is an new scientist on this
" They're here: the mechanism for poltergeist activity.
However Brian Josephson, a Nobel laureate physicist who is on the editorial board of Neuroquantology.
"This looks distinctly flaky to me," Josephson commented.
That would explain it seems cases of apparitions where people claim to see their people with past wounds. Such as a entity with a hole through his head but show that physical impression tide with his soul.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Why Idealism Does Not Make Much Sense Like Materialism
To me idealism does not make much sense like materialism.
Materialist's assume that only physical reality exists sees matter as absolute and consciousness as an illusion.
While Idealism sees consciousness as primary but seems not too take matter seriously.
Where DUALISM takes both of these realities sujective and objective both seriously.
Neutral Monism seems to not too take consciousness or matter seriously.
Materialist's assume that only physical reality exists sees matter as absolute and consciousness as an illusion.
While Idealism sees consciousness as primary but seems not too take matter seriously.
Where DUALISM takes both of these realities sujective and objective both seriously.
Neutral Monism seems to not too take consciousness or matter seriously.
Friday, January 11, 2008
The virtual reality universe
The virtual reality universe
Those of us who are more conspiracy oriented have long believed that the global elites have lied to us about things like the Federal Reserve, the Kennedy assassination, Oklahoma City, 9/11, and so on. But suppose that these are just their smallest lies, and that above these is the ultimate lie. Suppose that they have lied to us about the basic nature of reality itself, about that and about who and what we really are, and what are our true origins. Suppose that what we call the "real world" is more like virtual reality, a world composed entirely of data, of information.
Subtly and not so subtly the elites for decades have pushed the idea of philosophical materialism and atheism, using the schools and universities and the controlled media to indoctrinate people in the belief that the prime reality is matter, or, in the parlance of modern physics, mass/energy/space/time, the observable, measurable physical universe so beloved by our logical positivist scientists, or what passes for scientists these days. They believe that consciousness is a mere secondary manifestation of matter, with the brain being a sort of electro chemical computer. Of course, in such a universe, there is no place for God, so they also promote atheism and attack religion at every opportunity, conducting, these days, a virtual war against Christianity and Judaism, and promoting the insidious doctrine of moral relativism. Of course, the schools exclusively teach the Darwinian view of evolution, and exclude all mention of intelligent design, which, after all, requires a Designer.
This doctrine, until the time of the French Revolution, was rarely accepted, an early exception being the Epicurean poet Lucretius, who wrote De Rerum Natura. It is important to note that, ultimately, the materialists cannot define matter, but only describe it, and that they are a bit hazy on the details of consciousness.
All along, however, there has been an opposing view, philosophical idealism, which claims that the prime reality is mind/spirit/soul/consciousness/thought, which, ultimately idealists cannot define. In this philosophy the physical universe (and much more) consists of the mind's thoughts .If this view seems unrealistic to most people, it is because we have all been programmed to think it so. Actually, simple logic can show that the idealist view is almost certainly the correct one.
Suppose that a materialist has before him a table. How does he really, truly know beyond all doubt that the table has a reality independent of his mind? This is no mere sophistry; it is vitally important that we understand what the real certainties are. The materialist will say that he sees the table. Asked how, he will say that light is reflected from it and is focused by the lenses of his eyes upon his retinas, causing the optic nerves to send a signal to his brain. But how does he know with absolute certainty that light exists, or his eyes, or that his consciousness is composed of a physical brain? The materialist may argue that he can touch and feel the table, but, again, how does he know for sure that he has physical hands? All he knows with certainty is that he thinks he sees and feels the table, and he thinks that light exists, and he thinks that he has eyes, hands, and a brain. In other words, all that any of us can be sure of is that we think, in other words, we are minds and consciousness exists. The physical universe out there may or may not have an independent existence.
And yet materialists insist that the physical universe, whose very existence is unproven, is the prime reality, and that thought, the only thing we can be sure of, is secondary. Isn't this backward reasoning? Isn't it vastly more likely that the reverse is true?
The implications of idealism are far reaching. For us all to more or less perceive the same reality around us, to see the same objects, for example, our minds must be interconnected at some level. But if we are all connected, we are all part of a vast, universal mind, which means that there is some kind of supreme being. In other words, as Jews and Christians insist, God is a being, not just a concept. But, as Eastern mystics insist, we are all part of God. Understand that there is also a Christian mystical tradition, and that I am not advocating here the kind of perverted pantheism that leads to nature worship. As to the true nature of God, that remains a mystery. Also, if our minds are the prime reality, there must be some kind of afterlife, either reincarnation or existence in a spiritual realm. And if there is a supreme being, it is likely that there are moral absolutes.
And, if the universe is a great mind, a consensus reality or virtual reality of which we are all components, thought and symbol matter. In other words, we live in a magical universe. When the elites do their monstrous acts on certain dates and on certain parallels of latitude, this enhances their power. They at least partly understand the nature of things and use the magic against us.
And the one thing that they fear above all else is that we will awaken to the true nature of reality, remember who and what we are, and send the elites and their henchmen back down into the darkness from whence they came.
Those of us who are more conspiracy oriented have long believed that the global elites have lied to us about things like the Federal Reserve, the Kennedy assassination, Oklahoma City, 9/11, and so on. But suppose that these are just their smallest lies, and that above these is the ultimate lie. Suppose that they have lied to us about the basic nature of reality itself, about that and about who and what we really are, and what are our true origins. Suppose that what we call the "real world" is more like virtual reality, a world composed entirely of data, of information.
Subtly and not so subtly the elites for decades have pushed the idea of philosophical materialism and atheism, using the schools and universities and the controlled media to indoctrinate people in the belief that the prime reality is matter, or, in the parlance of modern physics, mass/energy/space/time, the observable, measurable physical universe so beloved by our logical positivist scientists, or what passes for scientists these days. They believe that consciousness is a mere secondary manifestation of matter, with the brain being a sort of electro chemical computer. Of course, in such a universe, there is no place for God, so they also promote atheism and attack religion at every opportunity, conducting, these days, a virtual war against Christianity and Judaism, and promoting the insidious doctrine of moral relativism. Of course, the schools exclusively teach the Darwinian view of evolution, and exclude all mention of intelligent design, which, after all, requires a Designer.
This doctrine, until the time of the French Revolution, was rarely accepted, an early exception being the Epicurean poet Lucretius, who wrote De Rerum Natura. It is important to note that, ultimately, the materialists cannot define matter, but only describe it, and that they are a bit hazy on the details of consciousness.
All along, however, there has been an opposing view, philosophical idealism, which claims that the prime reality is mind/spirit/soul/consciousness/thought, which, ultimately idealists cannot define. In this philosophy the physical universe (and much more) consists of the mind's thoughts .If this view seems unrealistic to most people, it is because we have all been programmed to think it so. Actually, simple logic can show that the idealist view is almost certainly the correct one.
Suppose that a materialist has before him a table. How does he really, truly know beyond all doubt that the table has a reality independent of his mind? This is no mere sophistry; it is vitally important that we understand what the real certainties are. The materialist will say that he sees the table. Asked how, he will say that light is reflected from it and is focused by the lenses of his eyes upon his retinas, causing the optic nerves to send a signal to his brain. But how does he know with absolute certainty that light exists, or his eyes, or that his consciousness is composed of a physical brain? The materialist may argue that he can touch and feel the table, but, again, how does he know for sure that he has physical hands? All he knows with certainty is that he thinks he sees and feels the table, and he thinks that light exists, and he thinks that he has eyes, hands, and a brain. In other words, all that any of us can be sure of is that we think, in other words, we are minds and consciousness exists. The physical universe out there may or may not have an independent existence.
And yet materialists insist that the physical universe, whose very existence is unproven, is the prime reality, and that thought, the only thing we can be sure of, is secondary. Isn't this backward reasoning? Isn't it vastly more likely that the reverse is true?
The implications of idealism are far reaching. For us all to more or less perceive the same reality around us, to see the same objects, for example, our minds must be interconnected at some level. But if we are all connected, we are all part of a vast, universal mind, which means that there is some kind of supreme being. In other words, as Jews and Christians insist, God is a being, not just a concept. But, as Eastern mystics insist, we are all part of God. Understand that there is also a Christian mystical tradition, and that I am not advocating here the kind of perverted pantheism that leads to nature worship. As to the true nature of God, that remains a mystery. Also, if our minds are the prime reality, there must be some kind of afterlife, either reincarnation or existence in a spiritual realm. And if there is a supreme being, it is likely that there are moral absolutes.
And, if the universe is a great mind, a consensus reality or virtual reality of which we are all components, thought and symbol matter. In other words, we live in a magical universe. When the elites do their monstrous acts on certain dates and on certain parallels of latitude, this enhances their power. They at least partly understand the nature of things and use the magic against us.
And the one thing that they fear above all else is that we will awaken to the true nature of reality, remember who and what we are, and send the elites and their henchmen back down into the darkness from whence they came.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)