Things you don't like about Materialism

[atanu]

What you don't seem to understand is that words acquire new meanings as time goes by. You seem to be stuck in time with your dictionary definitions. The word 'materialism' doesn't represent one single worldview. It is an umbrella term. It represents things that even contradict each other at certain points.

What connect them is the assumption that everything that can be said to exist is a consequence of physical interactions. And the strongest argument in favor of this view is how successful the natural sciences have been so far.

That is odd. Sciences have been successful in what? Is it successful in explaining 'Origin of life and consciousness'? How success in unrelated areas makes us assume that intellect (the root of sciences) can unravel the very source of it. Why do we assume that intellect can unravel its origin, especially if it is generated through an unconscious mechanical-pysical process?

 

[Koldo]

That is odd. Sciences have been successful in what? Is it successful in explaining 'Origin of life and consciousness'?

Successful in explaining nature.

How success in unrelated areas makes us assume that intellect (the root of sciences) can unravel the very source of it. Why do we assume that intellect can unravel its origin, especially if it is generated through an unconscious mechanical-pysical process?

Why not ? We have been able to unravel so many things about the world.

 

[atanu]

Successful in explaining nature.

Why not ? We have been able to unravel so many things about the world.

Why not? Yes, why not?

I am yet to see a character in a novel to successfully explain its own author. So, I do not know the probability of an intellect, supposedly created in some mechanistic way by inert materials, unraveling the mystery of its own creation.

 

[Polymath257]

Thank you. I have been exposed to this concept innumerable times in past by Mr. PolyHedral.

I need you to explain to me these.

1. There is an awareness "This is program state' n', which is different from program state 'n-1' ...... and so forth. Then who am I that keeps knowing these program states?"

Self-consciousness is a program that runs that monitors some of the other processes in the brain to model how to interact with the world. That monitoring is the 'this state is different than that state'

2. n this model, death is probably equal to degradation of hardware and its failure to runtime software?

Yes. When the neurons stop firing, we die. Some of our organs can live longer because they have lower energy requirements than the brain, but 'I' die when the brain does.

 

[Koldo]

Why not? Yes, why not?

I am yet to see a character in a novel to successfully explain its own author.

If we are not characters in a novel then this is not a pertinent parallel.

So, I do not know the probability of an intellect, supposedly created in some mechanistic way by inert materials, unraveling the mystery of its own creation.

Gladly we don't need to determine the probability to actually do it.

 

[Polymath257]

Why not? Yes, why not?

I am yet to see a character in a novel to successfully explain its own author. So, I do not know the probability of an intellect, supposedly created in some mechanistic way by inert materials, unraveling the mystery of its own creation.

And the way for it to do so is through observation, testing, hypothesis formation, etc. In other words, the scientific method.

YOu may be taking the term 'mechanistic' too far. From what we know, the universe is NOT deterministic. It is probabilistic at a fundamental level (quantum mechanics). Also, the idea of 'inert materials' is a misnomer: real materials interact with each other chemically and physically, even if they are not alive (hydrogen and oxygen and a spark will produce an explosion). A biological system is actually formed from a great number of highly reactive materials interacting with each other. That is what biochemistry studies.

 

[atanu]

And the way for it to do so is through observation, testing, hypothesis formation, etc. In other words, the scientific method.

YOu may be taking the term 'mechanistic' too far. From what we know, the universe is NOT deterministic. It is probabilistic at a fundamental level (quantum mechanics). Also, the idea of 'inert materials' is a misnomer: real materials interact with each other chemically and physically, even if they are not alive (hydrogen and oxygen and a spark will produce an explosion). A biological system is actually formed from a great number of highly reactive materials interacting with each other. That is what biochemistry studies.

We know that these are speculations.

 

[atanu]

If we are not characters in a novel then this is not a pertinent parallel.

The point is that created intelligence cannot reach its source.

 

[Polymath257]

We know that these are speculations.

Actually, what you quoted here was NOT speculation. That materials interact strongly and are not 'inert' is well verified. That biological materials interact strongly is well verified. That biological systems are composed of large numbers of interacting chemicals is well verified.

Whether the nature and type of these interactions is enough to explain consciousness is not verified.

 

[atanu]

Actually, what you quoted here was NOT speculation. That materials interact strongly and are not 'inert' is well verified. That biological materials interact strongly is well verified. That biological systems are composed of large numbers of interacting chemicals is well verified.

Whether the nature and type of these interactions is enough to explain consciousness is not verified.

That life-awareness was/is created by these is speculation.

 

[atanu]

Self-consciousness is a program that runs that monitors some of the other processes in the brain to model how to interact with the world. That monitoring is the 'this state is different than that state'

You are basically telling me "I know that I am a stream of ever-changing program states".

 

[Polymath257]

That life-awareness was/is created by these is speculation.

That life is created by these is known. That awareness is speculated.

 

[Polymath257]

You are basically telling me "I know that I am a stream of ever-changing program states".

Not quite. it is speculation at this point because we don't know specific mechanisms. But the mass of evidence is in favor of this position.

 

[Koldo]

The point is that created intelligence cannot reach its source.

Prove it.

 

[Polymath257]

The point is that created intelligence cannot reach its source.

Why would you think that?

 

[atanu]

Prove it.

You show me a created thing that understands its creator. There is nothing to prove.

 

[Polymath257]

You show me a created thing that understands its creator. There is nothing to prove.

Why do you assume there is a 'creator'? There was an evolutionary process. I don't see any reason to expect that process to be impossible to investigate.

 

[Koldo]

You show me a created thing that understands its creator. There is nothing to prove.

This is called Argument from Ignorance.

 

[atanu]

Not quite. it is speculation at this point because we don't know specific mechanisms. But the mass of evidence is in favor of this position.

Okay. At least you are honest about this speculation. But suppose your speculation is correct. In that case are you not claiming "I know that I am a stream of ever-changing program states"?

Spoiler: Guess work

(I intuit that a partial understanding of teachings of the Buddha has led to mass delusion that an ever-changing mass of consciousness is equal to the awareness "I". Buddha actiually taught that one must know that the changeable is not the self.)

 

[atanu]

Why do you assume there is a 'creator'? There was an evolutionary process. I don't see any reason to expect that process to be impossible to investigate.

I am not assuming that at all. I hold that consciousness is unborn and thus true.

OTOH, different flavours of materialists assume creation of consciousness -- e.g.. from program states, or from neuronal interactions, or from structures of matter etc. etc.