(September 26, 2015 at 10:14 pm)bennyboy Wrote:(September 25, 2015 at 9:46 am)Rhythm Wrote: Neither of these things -are- but if you cannot provide an idealists explanation of mind - then why would it matter if there -were- no materialist explanation? How important can this be to you?I see physicalism as essentially exclusive, and idealism as essentially inclusive, and that's why the difference is important. "Show me the evidence or stfu" with regards to issues of mind, or philosophical issues like those of morality or of beauty, ignores an important facet of human experience-- that not all experiences are sharable or reproducible. To idealism, this is nothing at all: some ideas are sharable, some are personal, and so long as we agree which ideas those are, we're peachy.
Hi Benny. I was wondering if you could clarify something for me about your position? Here you talk about issues of morality and beauty and sharable and reproducible. Is it your position that certain aspects of conscious experience, like the experience of beauty, are not hypothetically reproducible... or have I got the wrong end of the stick? In other words if you hypothetically made an exact copy of a brain in a particular state of processing, right down to the quantum level, that it would not reproduce certain conscious experiences such as beauty? This being regardless of whether it's a materialistic reality or one that acts like it is.
