|
Idealism is more Rational than Materialism
|
LastPoet
 Leader of the gang of jerkoffs(tm)  Religious Views: L'Uomo verrà portato dalla sua creazione (February 2, 2015 at 11:20 am)Alex K Wrote: I think now that OP is promoting solipsism, after all, it is, by the same faulty reasoning, wholly unnecessary to postulate the existence of other people. They all do eventually, being backed into a corner, apologists of any kind tend to that. pseudo-mathematically speaking, the limit of religious apologetics, when faced with facts, tend to solipsism. If only we could get a nobel prize for that. 
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them.
-Galileo  RE: Idealism is more Rational than Materialism
February 2, 2015 at 12:00 pm
(This post was last modified: February 2, 2015 at 12:00 pm by Mudhammam.)
That Rational__AKD believes idealism "implies" theism, free will, life after death, and I'm sure any other magic spell anyone else would like to cast, while tragically hilarious, tells me pretty much all I need to know about his understanding of logic.
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
(February 2, 2015 at 11:18 am)Chas Wrote: We gain confidence in our perception when that perception is supported by evidence, by the result of trial and error, and by the concordance with others' interpretations.you only gain the evidence by perceiving it. you are essentially saying your perception of reality is accurate because we perceive it... (February 2, 2015 at 11:18 am)Chas Wrote: The fact that we share a common understanding of reality supports the claim that there is one.no, sharing common understanding of reality supports the claim we have a common perception of reality. we still don't get to statements about reality with common perceptions. (February 2, 2015 at 11:18 am)Chas Wrote: Maybe you can, but it would only exist in your mind.not necessarily. my view on idealism is that there are distinct yet similar minds (which are what we are) and they are part of a greater consciousness (which is what God is). I explained all this in the OP, I suggest you read it. (February 2, 2015 at 11:18 am)Chas Wrote: Again, no. The evidence of shared experience says you are almost certainly wrong.just because we all perceive the same thing doesn't make it any more true of reality. we know matter doesn't have color, it is merely a perception. it is a simplistic model to explain a more complex concept of wavelengths.
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them.
-Galileo 
AKD, I agree with much of your philosophy, but they lead to some pretty strange claims, at least from my perspective.
 RE: Idealism is more Rational than Materialism
February 2, 2015 at 12:03 pm
(This post was last modified: February 2, 2015 at 12:06 pm by Alex K.)
(February 2, 2015 at 12:00 pm)Rational AKD Wrote:(February 2, 2015 at 11:18 am)Chas Wrote: Maybe you can, but it would only exist in your mind.not necessarily. my view on idealism is that there are distinct yet similar minds (which are what we are) and they are part of a greater consciousness (which is what God is). I explained all this in the OP, I suggest you read it. We've read it. It's just such a heap of entirely unjustified assumptions, which you seem to make out of prejudice, but which you try to convince us are logically necessary. Distinct yet similar minds, part of a greater consciousness. Once you're at that level of complication, it's more parsimonious to adopt materialism.
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
(February 2, 2015 at 11:20 am)Alex K Wrote:except in the idealistic model, to be a solipsist is to say you are the super conscious rather than the conscious within the super conscious. if you are the super conscious, then you should have full control of the apparently physical reality since you mentally constructed it. you apparently do not have this control even though you should if you are the super conscious. this is evidence that you are not which would make you a consciousness within a super conscious. this makes the idealistic view more reasonable than the extreme solipsist view.(February 2, 2015 at 11:18 am)Chas Wrote: Again, no. The evidence of shared experience says you are almost certainly wrong.
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them.
-Galileo
The Super Conscious!
Starring Johnny Depp! Coming soon to a theatre near you!
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
 (February 2, 2015 at 12:00 pm)Rational AKD Wrote:(February 2, 2015 at 11:18 am)Chas Wrote: We gain confidence in our perception when that perception is supported by evidence, by the result of trial and error, and by the concordance with others' interpretations.you only gain the evidence by perceiving it. you are essentially saying your perception of reality is accurate because we perceive it... No, it is corroboration that we perceive the same thing. Quote:(February 2, 2015 at 11:18 am)Chas Wrote: The fact that we share a common understanding of reality supports the claim that there is one.no, sharing common understanding of reality supports the claim we have a common perception of reality. we still don't get to statements about reality with common perceptions. Then what are we perceiving? Quote:(February 2, 2015 at 11:18 am)Chas Wrote: Maybe you can, but it would only exist in your mind.not necessarily. my view on idealism is that there are distinct yet similar minds (which are what we are) and they are part of a greater consciousness (which is what God is). I explained all this in the OP, I suggest you read it. I read it. It is unsubstantiated woo. Quote:(February 2, 2015 at 11:18 am)Chas Wrote: Again, no. The evidence of shared experience says you are almost certainly wrong.just because we all perceive the same thing doesn't make it any more true of reality. we know matter doesn't have color, it is merely a perception. it is a simplistic model to explain a more complex concept of wavelengths. Which doesn't make light any less real. Your word games remain unpersuasive.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method. (February 2, 2015 at 12:03 pm)Alex K Wrote: We've read it. It's just such a heap of entirely unjustified assumptions, which you seem to make out of prejudice, but which you try to convince us are logically necessary. Distinct yet similar minds, part of a greater consciousness. Once you're at that level of complication, it's more parsimonious to adopt materialism.so it's more parsimonious to postulate a substance we do not perceive that is behind the substances we do perceive? such a view is unverifiable. we only experience mental perceptions. why suggest a new substance that we don't experience to explain this experience? if mental substances are all that exist, then reality is something we perceive. materialism assumes a substance that is not how we perceive, full of color and other qualia, suggesting our perceptions can't help us know what reality is.
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them.
-Galileo |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
