(September 25, 2015 at 7:54 am)Rhythm Wrote: We'd agreed to that -long- ago, but it's uninformative /w regards to proving a metaphysical claim and more specifically uninformative with regards to any implication-sans-proof between idealism or materialism. What's the problem...and does idealism incorporate this, as materialism does with comp and information theories, or does it simply state their existence as brute fact? That would be important, to me.
Generally, when one model is capable of explaining what another refers to as a brute fact...I abandon the latter in favor of the former.
I find the explanations of physicalism with regards to (for example) mind to be so question begging that they are equally useless-- no matter how detailed they are. Saying "the brain causes mind" feels right, but actually it's a non-sequitur if you don't know where our experiences of brains ultimately come from. . . and no, you don't get to just say, "the brain, of course," because circles are bad.
