Occams Hatchet and Is Materialism "Special"

[Bunburryist]

First thing – Is there anything wrong with using the default text settings with which we are all familiar?

Is there something “special” about the materialist brain-mind theory … or can we assume that, like virtually every other scientific theory, will it in the future be replaced by a theory in a different paradigm… Try showing a person whose very thinking embodies the materialist worldview the flaws in that worldview!

It seems that on AF materialism and physicalism are terms of art. As such, debates about whether these theories are outdated or have been overturned quickly get bogged down in arguments over semantics. Recently someone found my use of the term ‘reductionism’ objectionable. I believe the tenacity of materialism/physicalism has very little to do with sound metaphysics or contemporary scientific confirmation; but rather, the lingering influence of post-Enlightenment industrial culture. In Western societies, people habitually rely on the metaphors of machine production and interchangeable parts to make sense of themselves and the world around them. This mechanistic bias informs the thinking of seemingly everyone from accountants to zoologists. Sadly, I find myself less and less interested in debating philosophy on AF.  Questioning the philosophical moves of Descartes, Hume and Kant is something unthinkable to anyone who is either unwilling or unable to consider how the larger culture channels their thinking toward the mechanistic assumptions that inform their commitments to materialism/physicalism.

I can already here one objection. What about religion? Theology is not immune to industrial metaphors. It can be found in contemporary creationism and textual criticism, but I think that is beyond the scope of the OP.

Sorry about the text - I pasted it over from Word.  I'm still learning how this world works!  As for the "metaphors of machine production," I see that in today's idea that our minds are "programs running in computer brains."  I know it's hard to get across, but my main point is that we are not "things in a world," that we really don't know what we are.  I'd rather believe not know what I am - and know it - than believe I'm something I'm not.  But at least I'm aware of these ideas I learned to believe as a kid.  For most people, uninterested is such things, it's just there in the background forming their implicit conception of what they are.  Because of the material worldview nature of human language, pasted over by what we learn to be scientific ideas (my mind happens in a thing called a brain, etc.), the average person, who often never even thinks about these things, just takes on this whole worldview.  Believe me - I know that these ideas of mine aren't going to really change people's minds, but it's something I find interesting, and I believe important - and so here I am.  Thanks for the thoughts.