• Jamesk
    317
    Matter--substances consisting of subatomic particles, which combine to make atoms, which combine to make molecules, etc. in various structures of gases, liquids, solids, plasmas, and Bose-Einstein condensatesTerrapin Station

    I wont pretend to even understand the last one but you seem to define matter as molecules that are made of atoms that are made of particles.

    Trees are particular combinations of molecules, undergoing particular processes. Hence, trees are matter.Terrapin Station

    So you are saying that objects are specific combinations of the components of matter?

    Mind is particular subsets of brain structure and function. Brains, of course, are composed of particular molecules undergoing particular processes, too--many different materials than trees,Terrapin Station

    Ok I have a problem here, firstly I don't understand what a particular subset of brain structure means. Secondly Brains and trees are largely made of water, so the must more shared matter between brains and trees than distinct matter. Also these processes you talk of bother me, surely a the matter in a brain (a thinking substance) is undergoing more processes than the matter in a non-thinking one?

    Trees are living and so perhaps can be seen as pseudo thinking in comparison to a rock let's say, however trees are in a constant state of growth and change whereas once fully grown brains are just slowly decaying organic material. We can see how a tree can be about wood, bark, branch, root and leaf, but what is a brain about?
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k


    You're not using "radical, brute separation of all things from one another" to simply refer to the idea of there not being literal physical laws that obtain everywhere, are you?
  • Jamesk
    317
    What are you basing this likelihood on?Terrapin Station

    On the other guy for sure :)
  • Wayfarer
    22.5k
    So I answered about weight. It doesn't really make sense to talk about a theory's weight, just like it doesn't really make sense to talk about the wind's weight, or it wouldn't make sense to talk about the weight of your circulation. That doesn't imply that the wind or your circulation aren't physical.Terrapin Station

    The wind - masses of air in motion - is physical. Theories and ideas are not. That is the point of the argument - quite a simple point, which has triggered pages of confused babbling.
  • Heiko
    519
    If all things are merely physical then what would be the universal principle that determines that physical laws obtain everywhere, even across regions that cannot be energetically connected due to the immense distance separating them?Janus
    Do you mean their nature?
  • Jamesk
    317
    So there is certainly a profound difference between idealist and physicalist views.Janus

    Would you say that as a theory materialism is instrumentally better than idealism? (in the Berkeley / Locke debate)
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k
    So you are saying that objects are specific combinations of the components of matter?Jamesk

    Well, objects are matter, but at least unless they're subatomic particles, they have "parts," if that's all you're basically saying there.

    Ok I have a problem here, firstly I don't understand what a particular subset of brain structure means.Jamesk

    Weird,

    So here's a structure of marks:

    //[[]]\\

    Here's a subset of that structure:

    []

    Here's another subset:

    ]\

    Secondly Brains and trees are largely made of water, so the must more shared matter between brains and trees than distinct matter.Jamesk

    What the heck would it matter if there is more of the same sorts of molecules, etc. than different? How would that in any way be relevant to anything I'd said?

    Also these processes you talk of bother me, surely a the matter in a brain (a thinking substance) is undergoing more processes than the matter in a non-thinking one?Jamesk

    Again, what would a quantification matter there? Why would we be quantifying whether there are more mental than non-mental brain processes?

    Trees are living and so perhaps can be seen as pseudo thinkingJamesk

    "Living" doesn't at all seem to be sufficient for "thinking."

    whereas once fully grown brains are just slowly decaying organic material.Jamesk

    Brains don't continue to increase in terms of extensional boundaries--your head doesn't keep getting bigger, obviously, but brains certainly keep developing as long as you're alive.

    Re the "principle of charity," what would you say is the explanation re it seeming like you're trolling, or like you maybe never really had any science education?

    but what is a brain about?Jamesk

    For example, did you learn nothing about brains in biology? I can give you some basic info or direct you to some online resources, but what this seems like to me is you trying to argue in kind of a cocky way from a position of near-complete science illiteracy.
  • Jamesk
    317
    Terrapin Station
    5.3k
    But music is not the thing you are sensing,
    — Metaphysician Undercover

    lol. You are really off your rocker.
    Terrapin Station

    Well in the case of the Grateful Dead it is something that they believe that they sense. They also believe that it is music :)
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k
    Theories and ideas are not. That is the point of the argumentWayfarer

    That's your thesis. And you're telling me it as if it's some revelation, as if I either pay as little attention to what you say as you pay to what I say, or as if I'm also going to pretend that I have no memory, that my brain is a sieve.

    I know you're not a physicalist. I am a physicalist, and presumably you know this. Repeating that you're not a physicalist isn't an argument against physicalism.
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k
    The short bus is here to pick you all up.
  • Jamesk
    317
    what this seems like to me is you trying to argue in kind of a cocky way from a position of near-complete science illiteracy.Terrapin Station

    I think that is called doing philosophy. If I wanted a scientific discussion / debate I wouldn't expect to find it on A PHILOSOPHY FORUM.
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k


    Philosophy isn't about pretending to be ignorant. You don't do good work in philosophy by feigning ignorance, or feigning an inability to reason, etc.
  • Jamesk
    317
    I know you're not a physicalist. I am a physicalist, and presumably you know this. Repeating that you're not a physicalist isn't an argument against physicalism.Terrapin Station

    Actually it kind of is.
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k


    What in the world would be the definition of "argument" you'd be using? "Saying something contrary to"?
  • Jamesk
    317
    Philosophy isn't about pretending to be ignorant.Terrapin Station

    Part of it is
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k


    Haha . . . we have enough problems without people pretending to be morons.
  • Heiko
    519
    An idea as such can hardly be matter as it is an idea. Talking identities. A letter as such is a letter and not some ink. Of course it is hardly anything else then. You could try to answer the question if the letter actually is some ink or a brain-state.
  • Jamesk
    317
    What in the world would be the definition of "argument" you'd be using?Terrapin Station

    That he doesn't accept your premise and has not been convinced by Bose-Einstein condensates
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k
    An idea as such can hardly be matter as it is an idea.Heiko

    Why can't we just go, "An idea as such can hardly not be matter because ideas are matter"?
  • Jamesk
    317

    At least Socrates thought so :)
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k


    So all I ever need to do with you in order to present an argument is disagree with you? Sweet.

    Too bad I didn't have you as a professor.
  • Heiko
    519
    Answer my question and maybe I'll follow.
  • Jamesk
    317
    So all I ever need to do with you in order to present an argument is disagree with you?Terrapin Station
    https://youtu.be/uLlv_aZjHXc
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k


    What was your question? Was it "Is a letter some ink or a brain state?" If so, it depends on the context. it can be both. Sometimes it's just one or the other. (And of course, sometimes it's things other than ink, too.)
  • Janus
    16.3k
    You're not using "radical, brute separation of all things from one another" to simply refer to the idea of there not being literal physical laws that obtain everywhere, are you?Terrapin Station

    No, I'm saying the idea that there are "literal physical laws obtaining everywhere" is inexplicable on the position that energy or matter is the universal substance, and logically incompatible with the idea that all connections between things obtain mechanically. To repeat, the vast distances between some things makes such mechanical (energetic) connections impossible due to the limitation of light speed.
  • Janus
    16.3k
    Do you mean their nature?Heiko

    And what would that be, as explained in physicalist terms?
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k


    Then you weren't addressing what I asked you to address and you instead wanted to change the topic to something you wanted to talk about instead.

    You had said that the idea of physicalism amounting to a "radical, brute separation of all things from one another" was a logical conclusion. I asked you to explain the logic--to show your work basically.

    Why change the topic to natural laws? (I'm not a realist on natural laws, by the way.)
  • Jamesk
    317
    Why change the topic to natural laws? (I'm not a realist on natural laws, by the way.)Terrapin Station

    How can you claim to be a physicalist and not be a realist on natural laws?
  • Terrapin Station
    13.8k
    How can you claim to be a physicalist and not be a realist on natural laws?Jamesk

    What do you see as the conflict there? It's difficult to explain to you without having some idea of what you'd believe to be the conflict.
  • Jamesk
    317
    To me being one seems to entail being the other.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

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.