(2017-10-20, 07:32 PM)malf Wrote: [ -> ]Right. But I also see a lot of ‘proponents’ appealing to the authority of academic physicists who are sympathetic to some sort of psi. I guess we can dismiss those in the same way?
Certainly. At least for me.
The funny thing is I've seen more than a fair share of physicists who seem to take this approach themselves. They carefully point out that their profession doesn't lend itself to any special insight or wisdom into "meaning and morality".
(2017-10-20, 03:34 PM)nbtruthman Wrote: [ -> ]Here's a sample of Carroll's quality of thinking:
"
the laws of physics underlying everyday life are completely understood, "
Before he starts pontificating on the afterlife, perhaps he might explain how those laws of physics explain the living. How do the laws of physics account for feelings, such as suffering or joy. Which particles would he posit as having the ability to feel?
A really good summary of the materialist belief system that Carroll actually thinks can be a great belief system to live by. This is by psychologist and parapsychologist Charles Tart, from his book The End of Materialism. This is really the materialist creed - a very widespread philosophical/metaphysical position. A perspective found in most science books. Science seems to have degenerated into scientism, which is a functioning religion for many people. This scientism has predominated in our society for quite a while. Science functions as a revealed religion for most scientists.
The Western Creed
"I believe in the material universe as the only and ultimate reality, a universe controlled by fixed physical laws and blind chance.
I affirm that the universe has no creator, no objective purpose, and no objective meaning or destiny.
I maintain that all ideas about God or gods, supernatural beings, prophets and saviors, or other nonphysical beings or forces are superstitions and delusions. Life and consciousness are totally identical to physical processes, and arose from chance interactions of blind physical forces. Like the rest of life, my life and consciousness have no objective purpose, meaning, or destiny.
I believe that all judgments, values, and moralities, whether my own or others', are subjective, arising solely from biological determinants, personal history, and chance. Free will is an illusion. Therefore, the most rational values I can personally live by must be based on the knowledge that for me what pleases me is Good, what pains me is Bad. Those who please me or help me avoid pain are my friends; those who pain me or keep me from my pleasures are my enemies. Rationality requires that friends and enemies be used in ways that maximize my pleasure and minimize my pain.
I affirm that churches have no real use other than social support; that there are no objective sins to commit or be forgiven for; that there is no retribution for sin or reward for virtue other than that which I can arrange, directly or through others. Virtue for me is getting what I want without being caught and punished by others.
I maintain that the death of the body is the death of the mind. There is no afterlife, and all hope for such is nonsense"
(2017-10-29, 04:35 PM)nbtruthman Wrote: [ -> ]A really good summary of the materialist belief system that Carroll actually thinks can be a great belief system to live by. This is by Charles Tart, from his book The End of Materialism.
The Western Creed
"I believe in the material universe as the only and ultimate reality, a universe controlled by fixed physical laws and blind chance.
I affirm that the universe has no creator, no objective purpose, and no objective meaning or destiny.
I maintain that all ideas about God or gods, supernatural beings, prophets and saviors, or other nonphysical beings or forces are superstitions and delusions. Life and consciousness are totally identical to physical processes, and arose from chance interactions of blind physical forces. Like the rest of life, my life and consciousness have no objective purpose, meaning, or destiny.
I believe that all judgments, values, and moralities, whether my own or others', are subjective, arising solely from biological determinants, personal history, and chance. Free will is an illusion. Therefore, the most rational values I can personally live by must be based on the knowledge that for me what pleases me is Good, what pains me is Bad. Those who please me or help me avoid pain are my friends; those who pain me or keep me from my pleasures are my enemies. Rationality requires that friends and enemies be used in ways that maximize my pleasure and minimize my pain.
I affirm that churches have no real use other than social support; that there are no objective sins to commit or be forgiven for; that there is no retribution for sin or reward for virtue other than that which I can arrange, directly or through others. Virtue for me is getting what I want without being caught and punished by others.
I maintain that the death of the body is the death of the mind. There is no afterlife, and all hope for such is nonsense"
Interesting. I wonder what the materialist's reaction would be to this?
(2017-10-29, 09:51 PM)Silence Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting. I wonder what the materialist's reaction would be to this?
I'm wondering if there even is such a thing.
Linda
How can you both say the mind arises from physical processes, but morality and meaning are subjective? That makes absolutely no sense. If the mind is derived from physic processes, and meaning arises from the mind, then ipso facto meaning is objective. These are the kinds of things things that make physicalism a very flawed premise: you can’t maintain logical consistency with physicalism unless you deny the only thing you know or introduce an ontological inconsistency
(2017-11-02, 12:44 AM)malf Wrote: [ -> ]The Malf Creed
"I have no reason to believe I can interact with anything outside this physical universe, of which I appear to be a small part. The universe appears to have some predictable qualities that can be studied and modelled, but is at the same time utterly bizarre in a way my monkey brain is unable to fully grasp.
Sure, the universe could have a "prime mover" but see little evidence that it can be assigned an objective purpose or objective meaning or destiny. i doubt that the universe "cares" about anything.
I suspect, and see much evidence to support the notion that, all ideas about God or gods, supernatural beings, prophets and saviors, or other nonphysical beings or forces are superstitions and delusions. Life and consciousness are totally identical to physical processes, and arose from chance interactions of physical forces. That said, I suspect the physical is weirder and more magical than we generally credit. We are story telling creatures and construct purpose, meaning, and destiny to provide more palatable human stories.
I suspect that all judgments, values, and moralities, whether my own or others', are subjective, arising solely from biological determinants, personal history, and chance. Freewill maybe an illusion, but my choices feel free, and I still try and make good ones. Therefore, the most rational values I can personally live by must be based on my previous experiences, and not dictated by scripture or clerics. The criteria for forming friends are complex and certainly based on a myriad of reasons.
I suspect that churches are useful for social support, and have contributed much incredible culture (literature, art and architecture etc) but, on balance, have causesd as much strife as joy in this world; I have not discovered a source of objective sins to commit or be forgiven for, but history suggests that everybody benefits from an equitable society if there is a social contract with the 'golden rule' at the heart of it. Virtue is not defined by religious scripture, but scripture has borrowed heavily from the history of human nature and culture.
I suspect that the death of the body is the death of the mind. There is little good evidence for an afterlife, and all hope for such is... well... hopeful"
How's that?
I gotta say man, I find it fascinating that with your exposure over the years to various proponent arguments, the evidence in Parapsychology etc that you still hold some of the opinions you hold above. Do you think all the Parapsychology evidence is just due to fraud, experimental errors, bias etc then?
(2017-11-02, 05:28 AM)Roberta Wrote: [ -> ]I gotta say man, I find it fascinating that with your exposure over the years to various proponent arguments, the evidence in Parapsychology etc that you still hold some of the opinions you hold above. Do you think all the Parapsychology evidence is just due to fraud, experimental errors, bias etc then?
I mean, it doesn’t take much to see it’s fundamentally flawed. For instance, he cleverly left out from the churches part that churches, up until relatively recently, were pretty much the only bastion of education and science. We owe a lot of our fundamental scientific knowledge to various religious groups.