I personally wouldn't word it as "energy is material", but I'm not prepared to say that's explicitly wrong either. In any case, it's clear that a contemporary "materialist" world view includes energy. — flannel jesus
Astronomers theorize that the faster expansion rate is due to a mysterious, dark force that is pulling galaxies apart. One explanation for dark energy is that it is a property of space. Albert Einstein was the first person to realize that empty space is not nothing.
Dark Energy, Dark Matter | Science Mission Directorate — NASA
Both leaf and stone are spinning on the surface of a giant sphere at a thousand miles per hour. They don't fly off of the earth because its mass is so great that it pulls them towards it. The earth is spinning around a star. The solar system is spinning in a galaxy. The galaxy is expanding with the universe... Going the other way, there's a bunch of atomic and quantum movement too, so I'm told. — praxis
Yes. Absolutely. In my mind there is little reason to exclude the thinking, intuition and conclusions of others outright; especially if the work being done is about balance and hybridizing extremes. Being able to challenge myself with diverse sources of knowledge does indeed make living a wondrous thing. This is a hallmark of a good life, in my observations. — Bret Bernhoft
Yes. Materialists, for doctrinal reasons, typically lump Energy into the same ontological category as Matter. Admittedly, Energy is essential to Physics & Chemistry --- and I mean that literally. The common definition of Energy is "ability", but I think "potential" is more accurate : Energy is the potential to cause change in matter. And Potential (not-yet-actual) is by definition, immaterial and unreal --- although its effects on matter are immanent. Energy is indeed a Phenomenon, in the sense of an interpretation of sensory impressions. But the thing being interpreted is itself a Noumenon.Great question. Because that's not what the measurements indicate. Good science shows that these phenomena are part of the material world, but energetic in nature; immaterial.
What's really exciting about all of this, is that the immaterial aspects of this world are present, just waiting to be rediscovered. That is what entices me, as an individual. — Bret Bernhoft
The existence of dark energy is still in question and a materialist would have a hard time accepting an unknown energy but we can see, balance is essential, and it seems quite obvious to me, if the only energy that mattered was gravity then the whole universe would be sucked back together. — Athena
I fear you've built up this very narrow idea of what materialists think, that isn't actually what materialists think. — flannel jesus
Doesn't seem to follow though, does it? That "spiritual dimension" sneaks into the picture. Is that "spiritual dimension" a part of Nature? If so, a Naturalist may accept it as a part of reality, like everything else, including energy. The question would then seem to be whether if it's part of the Universe it is corporeal. — Ciceronianus
So, my philosophical curiosity naturally wonders about the original Source of that all-important creative & animating power. I don't imagine the origin of the world as a biblical Genesis, but Plato/Aristotle's abstract notion of LOGOS & Prime Mover suits me for philosophical purposes. That gives me a point from which to reason about our temporary sojourn in a habitat suitable for matter-transcending living & thinking creatures. :smile: — Gnomon
Why would a materialist have a hard time accepting an unknown energy? I'm quite certain that every materialist I know is completely comfortable with the idea that we haven't discovered all that's true about the universe.
I fear you've built up this very narrow idea of what materialists think, that isn't actually what materialists think. — flannel jesus
Why would a materialist have a hard time accepting an unknown energy? — flannel jesus
I know that was one thing one person brought up in the conversation once. I didn't realize that was the central focus. Is it?
"I don't know, but do you want to discuss sacred math?"
— Athena
Not particularly. — flannel jesus
The best way to discover the problem with being a materialist — Athena
Unfortunately, Logos and Prime Mover might be rejected by Materialists*1 as unprovable Transcendent beings or forces. For me that's not a problem, because they are merely hypothetical philosophical conjectures (thought experiments) or Axioms*2, with no need for empirical proof, only logical consistency. And, since they have no "favorite people", they provide no reason for slavish religious worship. They also have no need to "violate" natural laws, since they are essentially the LawMakers. :smile:Thank you so much! I think our discussions would be much improved the the notions of logos and prime mover. And from there, even the gods were subject to logos. — Athena
Religions shape cultures and that is not matter but is conceptual. Our concepts have power. That power can lead to us sacrificing human hearts to a god, or giving charity to people in need. It is as we make it. — Athena
Cicero said our failure to do well was a matter of ignorance because we would do right if we knew the right thing to do. That requires an education that is about good citizenship and good moral judgment and education for technology does not do that. I repeat there is more to life than matter. — Athena
Energy is, believe it or not, considered part of the material world. Materialists believe in physics. Physics is all about how matter is moved around and changed by energy. So saying these things can't be accounted for in materialism, and then saying "that's because it requires energy to happen", seems to be a misunderstanding of materialism.
Of course materialists believe in energy! How else could matter move and change momentum!? — flannel jesus
That is what Thomas Jefferson, and Cicero before him, meant when they spoke of the pursuit of happiness.
Before we focused education on the advancement of technology for military and Industrial purposes, we had education for conceptualizing, and being overly materialistic was deemed inferior. Learning a technology is for the working class, not the ruling class.
Concepts are not matter and yet they can be very powerful. Some concepts are very spiritual in nature and this can improve our health. Clearly, there is more to reality than matter. — Athena
Such as? :chin:There are obviously forms of energy that strict materialists don't embrace. — Bret Bernhoft
Such as? :chin: — 180 Proof
Yeah, I agree, especially (for me) the Cārvāka, Advaita Vedanta & (heretical) Theravāda traditions. :up:The amount of wisdom [insights] that can be sussed out from the Hindu traditions is mind boggling. — Bret Bernhoft
There are obviously forms of energy that strict materialists don't embrace. — Bret Bernhoft
Are those forms of energy something physicists know about and study? — flannel jesus
Yes, these energies are known of by science. — Bret Bernhoft
Which energies do you believe are known by science but materialists all reject? — flannel jesus
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.