Materialism as a religion

But one of the major postulates here is that the brain can still give rise to the unphysical mind, physicalism can be wrong, and idealism/post Mortemsurvival still be false. It’s not tied down either way, it just makes it less likely if physicalism is wrong ( which I believe it clearly is ).

Meh


I don't think ethics really "exist in the real world" at all in the way you're describing, so are unable to pose a threat to a physicalist position.



At least it has something in common with Bernardo's Idealism.


There's the rub. Is there a separate consciousness outside of the biological systems doing their thing... But you appear to be asserting a brute fact here.




I get that, and I'll play along

Biological process can give rise to conciousness, and it still doesn’t mean that conciousness is physical. Only physicalism postulates that.

Ok, it's a philosophical position. I don't need to go any further.

Correct. It’s a metaphysical position that I’m railing against.

But one of the major postulates here is that the brain can still give rise to the unphysical mind, physicalism can be wrong, and idealism/post Mortemsurvival still be false. It’s not tied down either way, it just makes it less likely if physicalism is wrong ( which I believe it clearly is ).

You keep using the phrase ‘give rise to’ and it leads you astray. The physicalist model I’m presenting sees the mind as physical; it simply is the millions of biological processes (that we know are occurring) doing what they do. Consciousness isn’t separate from those processes. It feels like you have a inner life and it appears to benefit the species for individuals to construct a narrative that has their character in the leading role. However, try as we might, nobody has yet discovered a Cartesian Theatre.

You keep using the phrase ‘give rise to’ and it leads you astray. The physicalist model I’m presenting sees the mind as physical; it simply is the millions of biological processes (that we know are occurring) doing what they do. Consciousness isn’t separate from those processes. It feels like you have a inner life and it appears to benefit the species for individuals to construct a narrative that has their character in the leading role. However, try as we might, nobody has yet discovered a Cartesian Theatre.

But see, it’s clearly not. You’re only categorizing the mind as physical because of physicalism, when it clearly displays no physical attributes. It cannot be independently measured, and the contents of such cant be guaranteed to even exist at any time. You have to take into assumption that it does exist for brain process. Like I have to assume you actually have an inner life and conciousness, because there’s no way for me to physically measure it. Just hand waving off that distinction doesn’t work.

There have been several reasons why I've been posting less of late, but I have become less enthralled with nailing down the "nature of reality" and more interested in finding a philosophy to live by, independent of ephemeral underlying truths.

My best and lifelong friend is a highly dedicated and practicing Buddhist.  He discovered Buddhism while in graduate school and has gone on to make it the centerpiece of his life.  (He is very involved in his order; runs a center, etc.)

We were talking the other day and I was asking him about his thoughts on this materialist vs "more than materialist" (not sure how to categorize it   ) debate.  While we had a really good discussion and he engaged with a lot of depth it was clear that he ultimately found the exercise, well, non-central.

He's found something in his practice that is most meaningful.  Its "known" to him for lack of a better word.

This just struck me as I read your self described evolution (perhaps ongoing?) from nailing down reality to finding something to live by.

While I never do it, my friend would advise you to start a meditative practice.  I'm not sure why I don't do it beyond laziness.  Its certainly appealing at an intellectual, 'make my life better' sort of level.

But see, it’s clearly not. You’re only categorizing the mind as physical because of physicalism, when it clearly displays no physical attributes. It cannot be independently measured, and the contents of such cant be guaranteed to even exist at any time. You have to take into assumption that it does exist for brain process. Like I have to assume you actually have an inner life and conciousness, because there’s no way for me to physically measure it. Just hand waving off that distinction doesn’t work.

Space displays no physical characteristics yet space can be warped in many ways and those warpings can be measured so to speak. Claiming consciousness isn't physical for that reason is a misstep. Implying  consciousness is not brain generated is exclusively a metaphysical position in origin.

Space displays no physical characteristics yet space can be warped in many ways and those warpings can be measured so to speak. Claiming consciousness isn't physical for that reason is a misstep. Implying  consciousness is not brain generated is exclusively a metaphysical position in origin.

What? Of course space has characteristics that are measurable. That’s crazy to think that it doesn’t. Also, implying consciousness isn’t brain generated isn’t at all a metaphysical position. It’s an empirical one. On top of that, no one actually is debating here about brain generated conciousness, just whether or not that conciousness has the characterizations of ontologically physical things. 

Please educate yourself on this conversation before you brazenly inject your opinion into it.

What? Of course space has characteristics that are measurable. That’s crazy to think that it doesn’t. Also, implying consciousness isn’t brain generated isn’t at all a metaphysical position. It’s an empirical one. On top of that, no one actually is debating here about brain generated conciousness, just whether or not that conciousness has the characterizations of ontologically physical things. 

Please educate yourself on this conversation before you brazenly inject your opinion into it.

Name one character of space that is quantifiable?
I think your way off the mark. Ever since Skeptiko and now here the assumption is brain and mind are separate things even so far as to be labeled non-local and some have argued the brain is nothing more than a radio receiver. To argue  those perspectives do not originate from immaterialists metaphysics as again silly.

I'll be as brazen as I choose.