(February 4, 2015 at 10:11 am)bennyboy Wrote:(February 4, 2015 at 10:04 am)Chas Wrote: Stalemate? Not really. The evidence supports the material existing without any consciousness.Except that 100% of that evidence was gathered via consciousness, you mean?
Since we discover new things all the time, the evidence is that they existed before we were conscious of them.
Quote:
(February 4, 2015 at 10:04 am)Chas Wrote: Except you would need to prove that the material universe does not exist without consciousness. You haven't.That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that consciousness is an incontrovertible fact, not really open to opinion. The material universe is a model, an interpretation of conscious minds of the things they have experienced. I don't see that the material universe is "proven," or that it should be the default. It seems to me that is must be assumed on philosophical grounds.
It may be that the material universe we think is there actually IS there. Or it may be that the way we process our experiences leads us to a false conclusion. But how would you tell the difference, without already have assumed your conclusion?
The material universe is almost certainly not what we currently think; we keep discovering new things about it.
If your position is that we are just making it all up, then I'm done here as that is solipsism writ large.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.