Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
The universe keeps running, whether we understand it or not. Whether we're here or not. It is not dependent upon our cognition.
-
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!
Do the Laws of Nature Exist Independent of the Human Mind?
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Buttercup
Veteran Member
Of course.
I'm telling our moms!
I think we need to define our terms in order to get out of this boondoggle, GC. I would agree with you that the patterns are the territory. It's just that I'm not prepared to call those patterns "the laws of nature." Instead, I reserve the term "laws of nature" for the maps we create of the territory. Is there any way we can reconcile our views here, then?
Very perceptive! A map is a territory to another map if that other map refers to it.
OK. But I don't yet see how that necessarily leads one to conclude that the laws of nature are the territory. That's because, so far as I know, there is no necessary reason for claiming that the patterns of nature are caused by laws.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
If there were no laws, there would be no patterns, only chaos.
Buttercup
Veteran Member
Exactly.
That seems to me an unfounded supposition. How would you demonstrate it to be the case?
Buttercup
Veteran Member
Um, the sun sets and rises every day?
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
No more unfounded than the supposition that the laws of nature exist only in our minds.
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
But in chaos, patterns may be perceived given a matrix, which the mind appears to be very good at doing.
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
Mommy, Sunstone's looking at me!
Well, if it helps, I'm working from the viewpoint that I cannot prove to myself that anything exists outside of my mind; in other words, I'm taking a solipsist position. So, the map may as well be the territory, I suppose.
Which becomes an infinite regression, like a mirror reflecting another mirror.
Fact: The laws of nature exist in our minds.
Speculation: The laws of nature exist only in our minds.
Speculation: The laws of nature exist outside our minds.
Are you disputing any of those three claims?
Fact: The sun sets and rises every day.
Speculation: The sun's pattern is caused by laws of nature.
In other words, the fact of the sun's pattern does not necessarily entail the conclusion that the sun's pattern is caused by laws of nature.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
I'm not disputing that either of the latter are speculation. However, the speculation that the laws of nature are dependent upon us to be... well, arrogant.
Buttercup
Veteran Member
By what laws does the sun abide?
There is no logical necessity why the sun has to abide by any laws, Rhonda. The question you are asking is equivalent to asking, "By what map does that tree abide?" The laws of nature are human constructs. They are maps -- descriptors -- of patterns we see in nature. If they have some existence apart from the human mind, we can neither prove nor disprove it.
Arrogant? Does that mean you've run out of sound reasons for your position and must now resort to creating mere characterizations of the opposing position?
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
Well, keep in mind where this speculation comes from; it starts with the premise that everything we perceive comes only from our minds. We are limited (or limitless?) by our senses and ability to interpret and analyze them. Our reason is even limited by them.
Even "arrogance" is nothing but a construct. Constructs, however, are still a part of reality.. Thus, though the "laws of nature" are only mental associations with the patterns that we perceive, they are the only laws of nature we know. In fact, it is possible that we create the very patterns by picking them from "chaos" (the void).
Buttercup
Veteran Member
But, it's so obvious the universe does abide by natural laws.
Sorry, what you're saying is the equivalent of, "if I don't say so, tomorrow the sun won't rise."
A question....what does your frame of reference hope to point out? Of what use is it if you don't mind me asking? If all inventors had the mystic bent....we'd never discover anything.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Note: that was supposed to read "I find the speculation to be arrogant."
That said, Phil, do you find the theological idea that we are the center and pinnacle of God's Creation to be arrogant? Because the idea that the laws of nature are dependent on our pitifully inadequate understanding of them is doing exactly the same thing: setting humans up in a place of supreme importance. I just don't think we're that special.