Dualism versus (neutral) monism, consciousness, quantum mechanics [Night Shift split]

To my knowledge, in all the research into clairvoyance and remote viewing and NDE OBE viewing there has been no hint of any detectable physical interaction with the physical scene. The NDEr can apparently pass through walls with absolute ease and no obstruction or interference from this solid matter. It seems that the ESP is directly sensing the physical configuration in space and time but without bouncing something off and processing the reflected bits to get an image.

Not sure it's "direct" so much as the freshly-ejected mind is still stuck in that "shape" of perceiving, so to speak. The mind, when incarnate, gets molded continuously by the limitations the brain and body place on the mind. It's the memory of the "shape", I suppose, that sticks strongly, from long exposure.

The whole conversation here completely disregards all the explicit evidence for Dualism. For example:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Journey-Souls-S...001MTENOC/

All the work of Stevenson (a psychiatrist, who was initially sceptical of the phenomenon) and Tucker seeking out evidence of reincarnation.

The evidence of Mediums, particularly those mediums tested by Julie Beischel using a multiply blinded protocol.....

Some people trained in science cannot stand the thought of Dualism. I suppose I was the same. I just got converted by the evidence over many years.

Yes all that can be explained away by Idealism, but when someone comes along with some reliable results that need the extra complexity (and vagueness) of Idealism, I'd rather stick with Dualism!

David

I don't think it offers explicit evidence for Dualism as the ultimate nature of reality. But the nature of this physical reality creates a duality of perceptions ~ of mind perceiving the physical reality through the limitations of a physical form.

Down here, yes, there is an apparent duality ~ but the ultimate nature of reality cannot be of mind and matter, as there are higher dimensions of reality when physicality means absolutely nothing and appears to not have any meaning as a concept.

So, all it does is validate my sliding towards a Neutral Monism where matter, and mind as we know it down here, are derivative of a higher state of existence that can give rise to both. Call it spirits, deities, souls, what-have-you, whatever it is that has the comparatively vast and ineffable power to create.

Again, the analogy of a dream world comes to mind... think a dream, except the world's rules and substance being extremely stable and non-malleable, and the inhabitants being external existences attached to and perceiving through dream avatars.

I don't think it offers explicit evidence for Dualism as the ultimate nature of reality. But the nature of this physical reality creates a duality of perceptions ~ of mind perceiving the physical reality through the limitations of a physical form.

Down here, yes, there is an apparent duality ~ but the ultimate nature of reality cannot be of mind and matter, as there are higher dimensions of reality when physicality means absolutely nothing and appears to not have any meaning as a concept.

So, all it does is validate my sliding towards a Neutral Monism where matter, and mind as we know it down here, are derivative of a higher state of existence that can give rise to both. Call it spirits, deities, souls, what-have-you, whatever it is that has the comparatively vast and ineffable power to create.

Again, the analogy of a dream world comes to mind... think a dream, except the world's rules and substance being extremely stable and non-malleable, and the inhabitants being external existences attached to and perceiving through dream avatars.

Well before you slide too far towards Neutral Monism, can you give a clear, unambiguous explanation of the difference between NM and Dualism?

Down here, yes, there is an apparent duality

Exactly - and shouldn't science focus on that apparent duality, rather than constantly shuffle it off with concepts like Monism.

Science needs to explore evidence, not find ways to distort or ignore it.

David

Well before you slide too far towards Neutral Monism, can you give a clear, unambiguous explanation of the difference between NM and Dualism?

... "slide too far towards"??? That's a weird way to phrase it... anyhow...

Neutral Monism resolves the interaction problem Substance Dualism has with its positing of two completely independent base substances of mind and matter. In Neutral Monism, mind and matter are derivative of a base substance that is inclusive of the qualities of mind and matter, making it feasible for it to give rise to both, and allow them to interact, by providing a common underlying medium.

Exactly - and shouldn't science focus on that apparent duality, rather than constantly shuffle it off with concepts like Monism.

Science needs to explore evidence, not find ways to distort or ignore it.

David

Science, as a practical methodology and philosophical practice, does work best practically with an assumption of Substance Dualism ~ because that's how this level of reality works, where we have our mind, and a clear delineation between it and the world of sensory perception of physical phenomena. Discussions of mind are not something science can meaningfully discuss, anyways, as it is not objectively empirical, so what science needs is rather irrelevant.

But on a higher level of existence than this physical reality, Dualism just breaks down, as physicality ceases to exist and so holds no meaning as a concept. NDErs are generally not constrained by physicality at all, and whether going into the light or the void, physicality doesn't exist there.

As another example... DMT trips ~ in what is referred to Hyperspace, physicality is the most worthless concept, as nothing akin to that exists for the tripper. It's an experience of a reality so very far removed from this one, to the point that it is extraordinarily difficult to find any kind of point of reference to compare between this reality and that one. And that's an experience that takes place while the tripper's body is still alive...

So, the afterlife, where there is no body or brain... if DMT Hyperspace was incomprehensible, then the afterlife is bound to even further removed from anything we can relate to down here.

Indeed... though in this case, the mind of the NDEr is in a higher state, whatever that properly entails, than the material world it is perceiving, but it appears from the majority of NDEs, the ones I'm aware of at least, that the NDEr is unable to causally influence the physical in any meaningful degree while out-of-body. Thus being able to pass through walls, on odd occasionally being seemingly able read people's thoughts and emotions, teleport by thought and intention alone.

There seem to be rules in place that prevent us from having much, if any, influence on the physical while not incarnate in a physical form.

There are OOBEs where there is some kind of physical contact. Same with apparitions.

Definitely something strange, but the evidence is still in the Monism camp as the supposed separation between domains & substances is not present. There seem to only be regularities (regulations?) that are not strictly enforced.

... "slide too far towards"??? That's a weird way to phrase it... anyhow...

Neutral Monism resolves the interaction problem Substance Dualism has with its positing of two completely independent base substances of mind and matter. In Neutral Monism, mind and matter are derivative of a base substance that is inclusive of the qualities of mind and matter, making it feasible for it to give rise to both, and allow them to interact, by providing a common underlying medium.


Science, as a practical methodology and philosophical practice, does work best practically with an assumption of Substance Dualism ~ because that's how this level of reality works, where we have our mind, and a clear delineation between it and the world of sensory perception of physical phenomena. Discussions of mind are not something science can meaningfully discuss, anyways, as it is not objectively empirical, so what science needs is rather irrelevant.

But on a higher level of existence than this physical reality, Dualism just breaks down, as physicality ceases to exist and so holds no meaning as a concept. NDErs are generally not constrained by physicality at all, and whether going into the light or the void, physicality doesn't exist there.

As another example... DMT trips ~ in what is referred to Hyperspace, physicality is the most worthless concept, as nothing akin to that exists for the tripper. It's an experience of a reality so very far removed from this one, to the point that it is extraordinarily difficult to find any kind of point of reference to compare between this reality and that one. And that's an experience that takes place while the tripper's body is still alive...

So, the afterlife, where there is no body or brain... if DMT Hyperspace was incomprehensible, then the afterlife is bound to even further removed from anything we can relate to down here.

Agree with the highlighted. But I still am puzzled over how neutral Monism handles the differences between the interactive substance dualism way that you admit matter and mind behave in the physical world, and the spiritual state out of body. Let's consider a specific concrete example, say during an NDE OBE. How can this sometimes actually encountered temporary (apparently) fundamentally dual state of existence be reconciled with the assumptions of neutral Monism? The problem is that in this NDE OBE disembodied state, both the physical brain (which is still alive) and the immaterial spirit/mind, still exist at the same moment in time, and they are experienced in fundamentally separate realms and consist of fundamentally different "substances".

In that situation at that moment in time, how can this person still be composed of one single ultimately fundamental substance when this person simultaneously exists as two fundamentally different and separate natures (the spirit consciousness (soul), and the unconscious physical living brain)? It doesn't seem to make sense. Dual aspect neutral Monism ideas don't seem to work, because an aspect is merely a psychological construct, what something looks like to an observer or experiencer. Aspect doesn't have anything to do with existential differences.

Neutral Monism resolves the interaction problem Substance Dualism has with its positing of two completely independent base substances of mind and matter. In Neutral Monism, mind and matter are derivative of a base substance that is inclusive of the qualities of mind and matter, making it feasible for it to give rise to both, and allow them to interact, by providing a common underlying medium.

Just positing a Neutral Monism doesn't really solve much at all. I mean matter is the only thing science can work with. None of its equations extend to include the mental part of the Monism, and in practice we have a situation in which science is totally Materialistic - even if it starts to talk about Monisms or Panpsychism.

As I see it, by tentatively accepting Dualism we have a way for science to explore phenomena which it currently ignores in one way or another.

Neutral Monism resolves the interaction problem Substance Dualism has with its positing of two completely independent base substances of mind and matter. In Neutral Monism, mind and matter are derivative of a base substance that is inclusive of the qualities of mind and matter, making it feasible for it to give rise to both, and allow them to interact, by providing a common underlying medium.

Well both Dualism and NM postulate two distinct components to reality, and both imply that these two components interact somehow or other.

Simply asserting that mind and matter are also derivable from a base substance doesn't seem to add much. I mean if Schroedinger's equation were combined with another equation relating to mind stuff, well what you write might have substance. However my gut feeling is that mind is not something that can be explained with equations.

Please understand that I am not getting at you - plenty of academics will side with you. However academics sometimes seem to get stuck in arcane discussions that ultimately get forgotten about - like the number of angels that can dance on a pin head (OK possibly apocryphal).

Science's attitude to Dualism is in stark contrast to its attitude to the problem that GR and QM are incompatible - both are used regularly! I think my main point is that science is usually waay more pragmatic.

David

Science's attitude to Dualism is in stark contrast to its attitude to the problem that GR and QM are incompatible - both are used regularly! I think my main point is that science is usually waay more pragmatic.

David

The discord between quantum mechanics and general relativity underscores the case for philosophical views like idealism or neutral monism, much like how quantum entanglement and the relativity of time challenge our understanding of reality. If the nature of existence were merely a matter of a physical domain devoid of any mental attributes, with all mental aspects relegated to a spiritual realm, one might expect this physical domain to be straightforward, governed by clear, coherent physical laws. However, the complexities and contradictions inherent in integrating quantum mechanics with general relativity suggest that such a simplistic, dualistic view of reality may not suffice. These scientific conundrums could indicate that reality is not purely physical in a conventional sense but might be better understood through frameworks that blend physical and mental aspects into a cohesive whole.

Agree with the highlighted. But I still am puzzled over how neutral Monism handles the differences between the interactive substance dualism way that you admit matter and mind behave in the physical world, and the spiritual state out of body. Let's consider a specific concrete example, say during an NDE OBE. How can this sometimes actually encountered temporary (apparently) fundamentally dual state of existence be reconciled with the assumptions of neutral Monism? The problem is that in this NDE OBE disembodied state, both the physical brain (which is still alive) and the immaterial spirit/mind, still exist at the same moment in time, and they are experienced in fundamentally separate realms and consist of fundamentally different "substances".

In that situation at that moment in time, how can this person still be composed of one single ultimately fundamental substance when this person simultaneously exists as two fundamentally different and separate natures (the spirit consciousness (soul), and the unconscious physical living brain)? It doesn't seem to make sense. Dual aspect neutral Monism ideas don't seem to work, because an aspect is merely a psychological construct, what something looks like to an observer or experiencer. Aspect doesn't have anything to do with existential differences.

Isn't this like asking how a person can be separate from their car?

Neutral Monism isn't denying a soul/body distinction, it's saying both the soul and the body are made of the same ultimate "stuff".

Admittedly the discussion of "substance" is itself a bit confusing here, because we often demarcate substances by their causal interactions. Yet it seems that what we have in this reality is varied characteristics of stuff that interacts via different rules.

For example, when a person able to do PK moves something with their hand & arm it seems to be different than when they move it with their mental effort. Yet there do seem to be some parallels here. Similarly when you see with your subtle body (soul), it has to be work different than when you see via your physical eyes but the result seems to be similar.

For Dualism you have to posit more and more ad hoc rules to try and account for these different yet parallel situations, which ultimately leads to the conclusion that there is some greater, more transcendent substance that makes up the spiritual and physical domains. Which is just Neutral Monism in actuality with a Functional Dualism.

To make this even "worse", there are aspects of mind that are arguably wholly "immaterial" - one of the important ones being the fact that physical stuff has no intrinsic meaning yet a thought about something is intrinsically about whatever you are thinking of. For example a picture of a tree could be interpreted as some alien animal, or turned upside down so its branches can now be a family tree. But a thought of a tree is always just that.

Another are the mathematical and logical truths, which we clearly interact as humans to apply the sciences and give them value. But they also are mental, and apparently exist in a way divorced from space & time in that their truths don't change in the way material things change nor do they have any real spatio-temporal location. One can add other Universals to maths & logic, in fact noted atheist Bertrand Russell thought colors were also Universals.

I don't think we can simply posit a new substance to deal with that which is immaterial, but whatever makes up reality does have to take account that which is immaterial in a philosophical sense along with the parapsychology data + data from mainstream sciences (biology/chemistry/physics). Neutral Monism of some kind *seems* like the best bet though this a term that encompasses a lot of possibilities.

There are OOBEs where there is some kind of physical contact. Same with apparitions.

Normal OBEs, I can fathom it happening on, yes. Does it also happen in NDE OBEs? They seem different in character.

Definitely something strange, but the evidence is still in the Monism camp as the supposed separation between domains & substances is not present. There seem to only be regularities (regulations?) that are not strictly enforced.

Yeah... there are rules, but they seem more like... patterns that can be temporarily overcome with the right amount of psychic effort. But they cannot be broken, as they seem to be a... fundamental habit of this reality's functioning.