What's wrong with
1 The world is all that is the case.
1.1 The world is the totality of facts, not of things.
— TLP
as a working definition for existence? This implies that 'whatever exists' is a fact – a contingent entity causally related to other facts; therefore, 'whatever does not exist' is a non-contingent entity not causally related to any facts. So abstract objects e.g. numbers do not exist but rather, as Meinong designated, they only subsist... — 180 Proof
non-physical doesn't make sense as a concept — Kenosha Kid
Non-physicalism is contended. — Kenosha Kid
Supervenience is a post-modern analytic construct...
— Mww
Intrigued, but pretty sure this is entirely untrue. — Kenosha Kid
But precisely because the mind is physical...... — Kenosha Kid
Am I going to be embarrassed in the morning? — “Kenosha Kid
Which is impossible, because it is the case that he must necessarily employ the very things he is attempting to revoke.
— Mww
This assumes what it seeks to prove. — Kenosha Kid
How would one define or identify the non-physical?
— Tom Storm
I've been trying to get an answer to this for years. — Kenosha Kid
How would one define or identify the non-physical?
— Tom Storm
I've been trying to get an answer to this for years. — Kenosha Kid
That's so confused I'm :yawn: — 180 Proof
— 180 ProofSo abstract objects e.g. numbers do not exist but rather, as Meinong designated, they only subsist...
But precisely because the mind is physical......
— Kenosha Kid
Errr.....what????? — Mww
Am I going to be embarrassed in the morning?
— “Kenosha Kid
I should hope so. — Mww
You should have no issues with the fact all theories are only logically proved when empirical validation is impossible. — Mww
The Principle of Complementarity? — Mww
But we can "weigh and measure" what the idea of materialism (e.g. material, or matter) refers to? — 180 Proof
Thus "physical" means by and large: "perceivable by the senses, not just imagined by the mind." And "non-physical" must mean something like: "not perceivable by the senses, but imagined or created by the mind."
Makes sense? — Olivier5
The above gives the impression that if you didn't sense it classically, it's non-physical. However if I can scan your brain and see a neurological correlate of your experience, I am sensing something about it in an indirect way (e.g. I could make predictions about it). This would keep it in the realm of the physical. — Kenosha Kid
By this definition, thoughts are physical, since they can couple with other thoughts and have certain properties such as being logical or not, sensical or not, etc.Physics defines physical things as things having physical properties, and physical properties are the capacities to couple those things to other things. — Kenosha Kid
This precision being made, when you scan my brain you may be searching for neural correlates for my experience, but my experience is accessible to you only by my telling you about it. — Olivier5
processed by different information-processing systems. — Kenosha Kid
Physics defines physical things as things having physical properties, and physical properties are the capacities to couple those things to other things. — Kenosha Kid
By this definition, thoughts are physical, since they can couple with other thoughts and have certain properties such as being logical or not, sensical or not, etc. — Olivier5
I'm not of the 'mind is an illusion'/'consciousness is an illusion'/'qualia are illusions' camp of physicalists. — Kenosha Kid
Mind comes under that: configuration of the neurons in the brain (brain states) and changes in those configurations (mental processes). — Kenosha Kid
The Principle of Complementarity?
— Mww
I'm guessing this is an example rather than a definition. — Kenosha Kid
Non-physical means non-real, basically. — Kenosha Kid
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.