Under materialism, consciousness cannot have any causal effect on the state of affair since the state of affair is defined in term of physical process. This leads to epiphenomena. What I am arguing is that consciousness has a causal effect on state of affair therefore materialism, given the definition in OP, is not correct. — bahman
Really? Fine. That is what the Daoist say. Consciousness causes the brain waves. You have unified mind and consciousness under materialism. They are one and the same. I'm with you.
However, I think you may find materialists quite in flurry over this. — Rich
As opposed to Daoism, which is clear and reasonable? — Michael
Ok, no one is advocating the same sort of materialism as in the 17th century. — MindForged
Materialism is a system of belief which emphasizes that physical process can explain all phenomena in the world. Consciousness therefore is an epiphenomenon within materialism since it is not a physical process but outcome of a physical process. We however know that consciousness is necessary for learning (please read the following article). This means that consciousness is causally efficacious. Therefore materialism is not correct.
Yes, it is exactly the same only minor contortionist tweaks like "selfish genes" and "Thermodynamic Imperative". There is no such thing as "material" for 100 years. Materialism doesn't exist (as the Daoists observed).
But academia keeps it alive.
The study referenced in the article doesn't actually show that. It shows that we're better at learning when we're conscious, not that we're better at learning because of consciousness.
It might be that consciousness emerges from brain state A but doesn't emerge from brain state B and that brain state A helps with learning. This explains the findings of the study without inferring that consciousness plays a causal role. — Michael
This doesn't follow. Under materialism it can be that consciousness has a causal effect because consciousness is a physical process. Your starting assumption – that consciousness isn't a physical process – is anti-materialist. — Michael
I'm just saying that the present-day 'materialist' or physicalist argument is more sophisticated than this. Their argument is that there is a set of explanations that use 'mental' language, as yours does, and that this is a rational set of explanations, but that nevertheless there is ultimately an underlying physical explanation, but without a one-to-one correspondence between the 'mental' event and the 'physical' event. Instead the one supervenes on the other. That's their argument. As I say, I don't agree with it, but in my view you need a better argument than the one you've come up with so far to deny supervenience. — mcdoodle
So we have a physical process which cause a brain state which is a physical process, lets call it mental process, yet the mental process affects the physical process? So you won't see that my particles obey laws of nature if you look at them? — bahman
If consciousness is the result certain potential processes of matter which occurs only when matter is constructed in a certain manner this suggests a form of panpsychism. This is the only coherent answer I have found and to believe otherwise I think is to believe in some sort of magic. — Cavacava
I gave you a scientific demonstration by raising my hand, but how is that possible? How can it be that this thought in my brain can move material objects? Well, I will tell you the answer. I mean we don’t know the detailed answer, but we know the basic part of the answer — and that is, there are sequences of neuron firings and they terminate where the acetylcholine is secreted at the axon end-plates of the motor neurons, sorry to use philosophical terminology here. But when it is secreted at the axon end-plates of the motor neurons, a whole lot of wonderful things happen in the ion channels and the damned arm goes up.
Oh bullshit man. The current view of the nature of the universe, even just from the standpoint of physics, has radically changed since the 17th century. — MindForged
This means that consciousness has a causal effect on physical process which created it! — bahman
, but the materialist worldview of that time has been dead for a long time — MindForged
Materialism is a system of belief which emphasizes that physical process can explain all phenomena in the world. Consciousness therefore is an epiphenomenon within materialism since it is not a physical process but outcome of a physical process. We however know that consciousness is necessary for learning (please read the following article). This means that consciousness is causally efficacious. Therefore materialism is not correct. — bahman
What does it mean to be a physical process as opposed to a non-physical process?Materialism is a system of belief which emphasizes that physical process can explain all phenomena in the world. Consciousness therefore is an epiphenomenon within materialism since it is not a physical process but outcome of a physical process. We however know that consciousness is necessary for learning (please read the following article). This means that consciousness is causally efficacious. Therefore materialism is not correct. — bahman
The brain state is the physical process. That brain state causally influences the world, most notably the central nervous system. All of this can be seen. — Michael
It is all information — Harry Hindu
Do causes even exist?
If causes do not exist, does any question about materialism even matter? — WISDOMfromPO-MO
What does it mean to be a physical process as opposed to a non-physical process?
Computers are excellent analogies of the mind-body relationship. What the software on the computer does is dependent on input (bottom-up). The computer then produces output based on the interaction of the software and the input (top-down).
The computer can be designed to learn - to change it's programming on the fly based on new input, which can be it's own output.
The physical vs. non-physical distinction is the illusion. When consciousness is caused and causes, in a relationship with the world, talking about different substances is ridiculous. It is neither physical nor non-physical. It is all information. — Harry Hindu
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.