• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

9 Simple Reasons for Any Rational Person to Reject Materialism

Thermos aquaticus

Well-Known Member
What is materialism? It is known as other things like material reductionism and physicalism among others. It is the view that only one substance exists – matter – and that all reduces to matter. This is a faith-based position that is spreading wildly through the West as a reaction to oppressive Western religions. It is philosophically unsound and has no supporting evidence. Let at look at this.

1) The “evidence” for materialism is that doing something to the brain effects how consciousness comes through. Take a drug or a hammer to your head and you may start slurring, seeing things, hearing things, stumbling, etc. This is not evidence of materialism because it is also expected in more supported positions such as dualism and idealism, as we will see. It is the only support that materialism has presented thus far in its favor and it does not even actually suggest materialism itself. We will look at this more below.

If consciousness was independent from the brain then consciousness shouldn't be affected when the brain is affected. Therefore, it is not evidence for those other positions.

The problem is that you have no evidence for consciousness being independent of the brain. All of the evidence we have shows that consciousness is entirely dependent on the brain.
 

WalterTrull

Godfella
Now what is relevant? Oh death very relevant
Yeah. Death is very relevant. Though entirely illogical, we all go through it. I mean EVERYBODY! Wow. To me it seems obvious that it's a growth thing. Can't see over that ridge but I'm pretty sure the other side is going to be interesting. You know like: " ...it does not yet appear what we shall be..." - John 3
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Nah. I think he was giving very good, though likely misunderstood, directions. It has nice application to the Jobish thing.
"For the thing which I greatly feared is come upon me, and that which I was afraid of is come unto me." - Job 3:25
Man, learning to walk is tough!
I like that I find very agreeable.
 

InChrist

Free4ever
Except they do. You believe in a God Who objectively exists? Then your thoughts about God originate in the material world, yes?


Know too many people who are completely shallow and have little to no desire for much thought.


The people who first talked about all those beings thought those beings existed in reality.

So how did the "people who first talked about these beings" come up with these thoughts of spiritual beings if their only point of reference was the material world? The scriptures reveal that the Being of God is Spirit, this is not something anyone would think up from observing the material world. While I think the physical creation testifies of a Creator, I believe the details concerning the existence and nature of God and/or spiritual beings is only possible through God enlightening humanity by revelation of Himself to various individuals in history and through His written word. Or on the darker side, malevolent spirits have interacted with humans.
Sure there may be those who don't think too deeply, nevertheless, all people think in abstract, non-physical concepts daily that cannot be explained as originating from the material. Just look at some of the thoughts you have expressed above... completely, thought, desire, exist, reality. How does one physically see, feel, or touch "thought" or see the idea of "completely"? The fact that people understand non-physical concepts shows that our person, our real selves, exists independently of our physical bodies and therefore we have a nonphysical dimension.
 

1137

Here until I storm off again
Premium Member
If consciousness was independent from the brain then consciousness shouldn't be affected when the brain is affected. Therefore, it is not evidence for those other positions.

Of course it should. In Dualism the brain is a receiver, in idealism the brain exists IN consciousness. Again you prove you haven't even bothered to investigate alternatives.

The problem is that you have no evidence for consciousness being independent of the brain. All of the evidence we have shows that consciousness is entirely dependent on the brain.

Keep repeating it, maybe it'll become true!

I'm a millionaire. I'm a millionaire. I'm a millionaire.
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Yeah. Death is very relevant. Though entirely illogical, we all go through it. I mean EVERYBODY! Wow. To me it seems obvious that it's a growth thing. Can't see over that ridge but I'm pretty sure the other side is going to be interesting. You know like: " ...it does not yet appear what we shall be..." - John 3
See I am not as disagreeable as I appear!

This materialism vs non materialism is a how many angels can dance on the head of a pin to me . Nature big us tiny..... God big us tiny... cosmos big us tiny... Nature big us tiny..... not difficult it seems like a city problem that tends to believe us big everything else tiny.
Or
Math big cosmos tiny
Bible big nature tiny

There, that's crazy but normal as well!
 

InChrist

Free4ever
There is no evidence against materialism there. Thought appears to be just a very complex chemical reaction.
How do chemical reactions or electrical impulses in the physical brain account for the sense of right and wrong, the beauty of a sunset, the horror at a child being abused, or the many rational and/or moral choices humans continually make? How do chemical reactions cause us to understand concepts as truth, love, justice, or mercy?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
How do chemical reactions or electrical impulses in the physical brain account for the sense of right and wrong, the beauty of a sunset, the horror at a child being abused, or the many rational and/or moral choices humans continually make? How do chemical reactions cause us to understand concepts as truth, love, justice, or mercy?
I do not know. But not knowing something is not evidence. "I don't know" proves the nonexistence of something just as strongly as it proves the existence of something, and that amount is not at all.
 

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
I don't think that is quite accurate. It may possibly be true only to the extent that there is no materialistic evidence, but the reality that we are more that only material is evident from the fact that we hold thoughts and ideas which are not physical, concepts which do not originate from the material world. Materialism cannot explain even the simplest realities we experience daily, much less profound thoughts,philosophical concepts, the drive for knowledge, desire for purpose, or appreciation of beauty, truth, or hatred of evil and longing for justice. The fact that we understand and think about non-physical concepts reveals that our real selves exist independent of our physical bodies. If the only thoughts we can hold are the result of some physical object in a purely materialistic world, then what physical stimulus evokes the idea of God whom we understand to be the ultimate non-physical Being? With no such physical stimulus humans could not possibly invent the concept of a non-physical God Being. The same holds true for Satan, demons, angels or any other spiritual ideas. I think the fact that humans have concepts of spirit beings and non-physical thoughts and ideas, that these thoughts do not originate in the material universe provide good reason to believe that there is some reality beyond the physical that this awareness has established itself in human consciousness.

All of your thoughts and ideas are the product of electrical pulses firing between neurons in your physical brain. Provide evidence of a consciousness existing WITHOUT a physical brain and you might have an argument.
 

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
How do chemical reactions or electrical impulses in the physical brain account for the sense of right and wrong, the beauty of a sunset, the horror at a child being abused, or the many rational and/or moral choices humans continually make? How do chemical reactions cause us to understand concepts as truth, love, justice, or mercy?

We may not know specifically HOW the brain accomplishes all of that, but all the evidence we have strongly suggests that a physical brain is required for any of the above things to occur. If you could supply an example of someone understanding concepts like truth, love, justice, and mercy WITHOUT a physical brain, you might have an argument.
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
So how did the "people who first talked about these beings" come up with these thoughts of spiritual beings if their only point of reference was the material world? The scriptures reveal that the Being of God is Spirit, this is not something anyone would think up from observing the material world.
Go back further than that. They thought these beings existed same as you or I. You could go over to Baal's house and have some nice grog or something. Satan was God's morality blogger. Some goddess sexual harassment victim of Apollo's could turn into a literal tree. As the bible progresses, you see that God and various other entities become more and more "spiritual" and abstract. It's almost like the bible becomes more atheistic as time progresses to cover for the fact the characters don't exist in the time periods of the authors.

Why would God be upset if humans ate fruit that could make them gods? Doesn't that imply that God was simply someone who found the fruit and ate it and didn't want to share?

How does one physically see, feel, or touch "thought" or see the idea of "completely"?
By understanding the chemistry involved.

You mess with the chemistry or the anatomy and you mess with thought. Mess with it enough and you'll never go back to the "previous restore point" as it were. Christianity promises transformation and yet drugs and therapy are far more effective statistically than just taking a short bath in front of a congregation.

for the sense of right and wrong
How do Christians, who have had God's word written onto their hearts, justify shooting children, raping women, etc?

the beauty of a sunset
People with allergies to sunlight aren't as amused.

the horror at a child being abused
The bible mandates killing your bratty kid. How Jesus escaped such a law with his attitude problem is fascinating.

FYI: I am not an atheist. I am a materialistic theist, a practical theist. I am not content with dogma. Anyone can make up stuff. I want data.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
What is materialism? It is known as other things like material reductionism and physicalism among others. It is the view that only one substance exists – matter – and that all reduces to matter. This is a faith-based position that is spreading wildly through the West as a reaction to oppressive Western religions. It is philosophically unsound and has no supporting evidence. Let at look at this.

1) The “evidence” for materialism is that doing something to the brain effects how consciousness comes through. Take a drug or a hammer to your head and you may start slurring, seeing things, hearing things, stumbling, etc. This is not evidence of materialism because it is also expected in more supported positions such as dualism and idealism, as we will see. It is the only support that materialism has presented thus far in its favor and it does not even actually suggest materialism itself. We will look at this more below.

2) The Law of Identity is the most basic and foundational law of logic and states that things with different properties cannot be identical – “A is A and not Non-A”. The material and conscious worlds have entirely different properties, including but not limited to (respectively); being spacial vs. not taking up space, being objective and being subjective, being universally accessible and being wholly private, and many more. We can illustrate this by looking at a brain, having others see it as well, and measuring the space taken up by the brain. Now imagine your fantasy man/woman standing in the room before you. Does she take up space? Can others see her? Are the traits that make her “perfect” objective? Of course not, because matter and consciousness have different properties, and so thinking matter causes the mind is a violation of the most basic logic.

3) Our own conscious experience is the one thing we know directly, and everything else we know of depends on us being conscious beings. This includes matter. So to reduce consciousness to matter reduces the one thing we know with certainty to something that we know through it. This is unreasonable.

4) Things like cognitive science prove the mind can override the brain. Self-regulation, internal coping skills, bio-feedback, meditation – all are conscious and willful acts that override the material body. This can be seen such as in a depression patient recognizing a depressed episode coming on and using skills like Self-talk and meditation to keep the episode at bay. This is scientific fact, and once you remove willful engagement from therapy it becomes ineffective. Further, and good psychiatrist will also recommend counseling or various therapies along with the physiology-altering drugs.

5) The mind is actually capable of manipulating nature, even changing it to suit its will. One example of this is in architecture, where complex buildings are created in the mind and then transferred into the objective material universe. Movies or music are another good example as they exist as ideas before they even become “reality”. Medication is another example where we literally change the nature of substances in order to affect our health, such as manipulating the flu to make yearly flu-shots.

6) Materialism also relies on the faith in future discovery. “Maybe one day we will find the mechanism that makes consciousness.” “Maybe one day we will explain how the subjective arises from the objective”. And maybe not. This is blind faith and nothing more.

7) The Upper Paleolithic Revolution was an event in human history that saw the species leap from “just another animal” to a species with higher consciousness. This led to the creation of art, religion, the rise of individuality, the creation of languages, the formations of societies, etc. Everything that let human beings become the dominant species on this planet occurred during the UPR. However, we had already existed as an evolved species for tens of thousands of years before the UPR. Further, this changes seems to have affected the species as a whole over a relatively short amount of time, rather than through the longer-term genetic changes we see with evolution. On top of this, the consciousness that it produced, as we have been discussing, had not only different properties from the natural world but was able to question, manipulate, and go against it. This again shows that consciousness is entirely different from the material world and how it functions.

8 ) Absurdity – in short, materialism leads to philosophical absurdity any way you look at it. For example it pretends to be a skeptical position but relies on the senses and puts what we know aside for what we know through it. This is the exact opposite of skepticism, and skepticism and materialism are mutually exclusive.

Further absurdity is that the only “evidence” for materialism amounts to nothing more than correlations – we may as well also accept the pastafarian position that the decline in pirates causes global warming!

Metaphors that materialism tries to create reduce to absurdity – for example they will say “mind” is what the brain does like “running” is what feet do, that “mind” and “running” have the same properties. Does running not take up space, can it not be seen, heard, felt? Another example is that water is not identical to the atoms which create it, similar to the mind and brain. Yet are both atoms and water not spacial, objective, universally accessible?

Yet another absurd reduction of materialism is again found in the single piece of evidence that doing things to the brain affects consciousness. Sure, maybe this means that materialism is true, but there is no other evidence that materialism is true! It would be like saying “well MAYBE magic leprechauns are the cause of gravity.” Sure that could theoretically explain it, but is that really the most rational way to go about it?

9) Finally, materialism is dangerous. For example we can look at mental and behavioral health and how those are treated. For instance, any good doctor who prescribes medication to address the physiological side of mental illness will also recommend therapy to address the mental side. As talked about above, without willful engagement in such therapy interventions no changes can occur. It would be dangerous to address only the physiological and not the mental aspects of these illnesses. Further, belief that individuals are deterministic machines with no control over their lives would make any kind of mental/behavioral healthwork impossible. Imagine a counselor telling a client to just say “**** it” because they have no control over their problems anyways!

It can also prove dangerous in other aspects of life. The best example of this to date is the Life-Fields of Dr. Harold Burr out of Yale University. Along with dozens of other scientists over decades of time Dr. Burr and company scientifically proved that L-Fields act as blueprints to all physical life. Measurements of these fields could predict cancer, disease, infection, depression, ovulation, prime times of learning information, and much more. But because the findings of Burr, Ravitz, etc. convinced them not only of a creator but of mind/body dualism, teleology of life, and a model to replace materialism, it was inherently written off as pseudo-science by the religion of materialism. Ironically, in the modern day Electric Universe theory is looking promising towards replacing that non-science “science” which has overrun physics, and the hypothesis is currently being tested. We will have to see how materialism reacts to this.

SUMMARY / TLDR

Materialism does not have evidence that supports it specifically and relies on faith in future discovery, it violates the Law of Identity, it puts what we know (consciousness) under what we know through it (matter), the abilities of consciousness go against the material world, consciousness can manipulate and change the material world, what we know about the rise of consciousness doesn’t fit with materialistic evolution as we know it, materialism reduces to absurdity, and materialism is a dangerous faith that puts its own beliefs over objective knowledge which could benefit human beings.

How would immaterial consciousness evolve? Not saying it's impossible, just highly unlikely.
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
What is materialism? It is known as other things like material reductionism and physicalism among others. It is the view that only one substance exists – matter – and that all reduces to matter. This is a faith-based position that is spreading wildly through the West as a reaction to oppressive Western religions. It is philosophically unsound and has no supporting evidence. Let at look at this.

1) The “evidence” for materialism is that doing something to the brain effects how consciousness comes through. Take a drug or a hammer to your head and you may start slurring, seeing things, hearing things, stumbling, etc. This is not evidence of materialism because it is also expected in more supported positions such as dualism and idealism, as we will see. It is the only support that materialism has presented thus far in its favor and it does not even actually suggest materialism itself. We will look at this more below.

2) The Law of Identity is the most basic and foundational law of logic and states that things with different properties cannot be identical – “A is A and not Non-A”. The material and conscious worlds have entirely different properties, including but not limited to (respectively); being spacial vs. not taking up space, being objective and being subjective, being universally accessible and being wholly private, and many more. We can illustrate this by looking at a brain, having others see it as well, and measuring the space taken up by the brain. Now imagine your fantasy man/woman standing in the room before you. Does she take up space? Can others see her? Are the traits that make her “perfect” objective? Of course not, because matter and consciousness have different properties, and so thinking matter causes the mind is a violation of the most basic logic.

3) Our own conscious experience is the one thing we know directly, and everything else we know of depends on us being conscious beings. This includes matter. So to reduce consciousness to matter reduces the one thing we know with certainty to something that we know through it. This is unreasonable.

4) Things like cognitive science prove the mind can override the brain. Self-regulation, internal coping skills, bio-feedback, meditation – all are conscious and willful acts that override the material body. This can be seen such as in a depression patient recognizing a depressed episode coming on and using skills like Self-talk and meditation to keep the episode at bay. This is scientific fact, and once you remove willful engagement from therapy it becomes ineffective. Further, and good psychiatrist will also recommend counseling or various therapies along with the physiology-altering drugs.

5) The mind is actually capable of manipulating nature, even changing it to suit its will. One example of this is in architecture, where complex buildings are created in the mind and then transferred into the objective material universe. Movies or music are another good example as they exist as ideas before they even become “reality”. Medication is another example where we literally change the nature of substances in order to affect our health, such as manipulating the flu to make yearly flu-shots.

6) Materialism also relies on the faith in future discovery. “Maybe one day we will find the mechanism that makes consciousness.” “Maybe one day we will explain how the subjective arises from the objective”. And maybe not. This is blind faith and nothing more.

7) The Upper Paleolithic Revolution was an event in human history that saw the species leap from “just another animal” to a species with higher consciousness. This led to the creation of art, religion, the rise of individuality, the creation of languages, the formations of societies, etc. Everything that let human beings become the dominant species on this planet occurred during the UPR. However, we had already existed as an evolved species for tens of thousands of years before the UPR. Further, this changes seems to have affected the species as a whole over a relatively short amount of time, rather than through the longer-term genetic changes we see with evolution. On top of this, the consciousness that it produced, as we have been discussing, had not only different properties from the natural world but was able to question, manipulate, and go against it. This again shows that consciousness is entirely different from the material world and how it functions.

8 ) Absurdity – in short, materialism leads to philosophical absurdity any way you look at it. For example it pretends to be a skeptical position but relies on the senses and puts what we know aside for what we know through it. This is the exact opposite of skepticism, and skepticism and materialism are mutually exclusive.

Further absurdity is that the only “evidence” for materialism amounts to nothing more than correlations – we may as well also accept the pastafarian position that the decline in pirates causes global warming!

Metaphors that materialism tries to create reduce to absurdity – for example they will say “mind” is what the brain does like “running” is what feet do, that “mind” and “running” have the same properties. Does running not take up space, can it not be seen, heard, felt? Another example is that water is not identical to the atoms which create it, similar to the mind and brain. Yet are both atoms and water not spacial, objective, universally accessible?

Yet another absurd reduction of materialism is again found in the single piece of evidence that doing things to the brain affects consciousness. Sure, maybe this means that materialism is true, but there is no other evidence that materialism is true! It would be like saying “well MAYBE magic leprechauns are the cause of gravity.” Sure that could theoretically explain it, but is that really the most rational way to go about it?

9) Finally, materialism is dangerous. For example we can look at mental and behavioral health and how those are treated. For instance, any good doctor who prescribes medication to address the physiological side of mental illness will also recommend therapy to address the mental side. As talked about above, without willful engagement in such therapy interventions no changes can occur. It would be dangerous to address only the physiological and not the mental aspects of these illnesses. Further, belief that individuals are deterministic machines with no control over their lives would make any kind of mental/behavioral healthwork impossible. Imagine a counselor telling a client to just say “**** it” because they have no control over their problems anyways!

It can also prove dangerous in other aspects of life. The best example of this to date is the Life-Fields of Dr. Harold Burr out of Yale University. Along with dozens of other scientists over decades of time Dr. Burr and company scientifically proved that L-Fields act as blueprints to all physical life. Measurements of these fields could predict cancer, disease, infection, depression, ovulation, prime times of learning information, and much more. But because the findings of Burr, Ravitz, etc. convinced them not only of a creator but of mind/body dualism, teleology of life, and a model to replace materialism, it was inherently written off as pseudo-science by the religion of materialism. Ironically, in the modern day Electric Universe theory is looking promising towards replacing that non-science “science” which has overrun physics, and the hypothesis is currently being tested. We will have to see how materialism reacts to this.

SUMMARY / TLDR

Materialism does not have evidence that supports it specifically and relies on faith in future discovery, it violates the Law of Identity, it puts what we know (consciousness) under what we know through it (matter), the abilities of consciousness go against the material world, consciousness can manipulate and change the material world, what we know about the rise of consciousness doesn’t fit with materialistic evolution as we know it, materialism reduces to absurdity, and materialism is a dangerous faith that puts its own beliefs over objective knowledge which could benefit human beings.


I think that about sums it up.. materialists use the unique power of their consciousness to prohibit that very phenomena from being involved as an explanation.

A skeptic of materialism simply goes further, takes the more inclusive view, he does not need to arbitrarily eliminate any known phenomena without good cause.

Merely accept both as possibilities.. the winner is fairly obvious
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So how did the "people who first talked about these beings" come up with these thoughts of spiritual beings if their only point of reference was the material world?
Because the human brain, even in tiny kids, is good at abstractions even a very basic level ─ this chair has a real referent, a chair is an abstraction, no particular chair. Abstractions are one kind of concept., and the brain can cheerfully mix concepts eg imagine a creature part lion, part goat, the chimera, or a horse with a single straight horn on its forehead, the unicorn, or an unknown creature that makes strange and threatening noises at night, and so on deep into the realm of myth, yarn, fairytale, Just so story, foundational epic, war propaganda, fake news, the whole gamut of human imagination.
The scriptures reveal that the Being of God is Spirit, this is not something anyone would think up from observing the material world.
I disagree. For example, the god who can't find Adam and Eve in the Garden, who chucks them out because he doesn't want them to become immortal, who kicks over the tower of Babel because the locals are getting too uppity, is acting just like a boss human. Only later does he have sophistication wished on him. Indeed, if you go for apophatic, he's now so abstract that it's only possible to say what he isn't, and even that tentatively.
Sure there may be those who don't think too deeply, nevertheless, all people think in abstract, non-physical concepts daily that cannot be explained as originating from the material.
As above.
 
Last edited:

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Keep repeating it, maybe it'll become true!

I'm a millionaire. I'm a millionaire. I'm a millionaire.
Keep repeating it, maybe it'll become true!

I have real evidence for dualism, I have real evidence for dualism, I have real evidence for dualism.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
materialists use the unique power of their consciousness to prohibit that very phenomena from being involved as an explanation.
Do you think consciousness is immaterial?

If you do, what objective test will distinguish the immaterial from the imaginary for us?
A skeptic of materialism simply goes further, takes the more inclusive view
What exactly does he or she include in addition to the material part?
he does not need to arbitrarily eliminate any known phenomena without good cause.
I was going to say that the total absence of a description useful to reasoned enquiry would be an excellent reason not to include this purported non-material part, but I'll hold that because you're about to give me just such a useful description, no?
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
The point I found particularly interesting was this one:

3) Our own conscious experience is the one thing we know directly, and everything else we know of depends on us being conscious beings. This includes matter. So to reduce consciousness to matter reduces the one thing we know with certainty to something that we know through it. This is unreasonable.

I don't follow substance reductionism that results in monism one way or another, but this is a worthwhile consideration. On the other hand, I think what you call our "conscious experience" could be understood in different ways by different people. Some personal philosophies center around ideas of ego and self, which is common in Western culture. The notion of "I think, therefore I am" exemplifies this. However, alternatives are possible in which the center as seen as non-self or others, which is more common in Eastern cultures. The notion that exemplifies this is "you are, therefore I am." Under this paradigm, the notion that our knowledge depends on an ego or self (conscious or otherwise) falls apart somewhat.
 

Thermos aquaticus

Well-Known Member
Of course it should. In Dualism the brain is a receiver, in idealism the brain exists IN consciousness.

When there is brain damage there is damage done to the consciousness. This shouldn't be the case if the brain is just a receiver. You can't damage your radio at home and cause damage to the radio station that is transmitting.
 

1137

Here until I storm off again
Premium Member
When there is brain damage there is damage done to the consciousness. This shouldn't be the case if the brain is just a receiver. You can't damage your radio at home and cause damage to the radio station that is transmitting.

Haha wait... So if I break my radio the stations will come through perfectly?
 
Top