Proof Mind is Fundamental and Matter Doesn't Exist

[bennyboy]

That's right, and that's what "may or may not" means.

You trolling me right now?

My ideas are self-evident, because I don't need to attribute them to a particular source.  I don't need to know whether there is an underlying reality or not.  Black box is fine, so long as you are content with what's inside it.

You just got finished telling me how something's existence and somethings nature are separate props a few posts back, that the existence of a rock may be self evident, but that it's nature or composition isn't.  That the claim "rocksa are self evident", for example, could not be support for or imply materialism.  Take your own advice.  That you have ideas may be self evident, what thy are comprised of is not.

That's right.

 Even within your black box, you still can't rescue your poor reasoning by calling something self evident.  Speaking of which, how many pages of the creationists playbook will you be tearing out and waiving around like a badge of pride?

I only call that self evident which is actually self evident-- the existence of mind, and my experiences. As for waiving. . . I've never waived anything except my right to an attorney.

Did you -really- not understand the cheese example?  It was an example of -why- the form you've used is invalid, -why- comp fallacies are useless, not an explanation of the fundamental nature of the universe.  Did you get that, twice now I've asked for confirmation?

The cheese example was a bad example. Try another one.

-You've made the same  assumptions.  It doesn't matter much to me whether you -do- know the truth, so much as I would like to help you realize that you -can't- know the truth using the lines of reasoning you've employed.

If I ever claim to know the truth, then please remind me of this.

Do you understand -why- the following statement is wrong:
"Evolution doesn't explain "x", therefore "y""

I haven't made an argument in this form.

Do you understand -why- the following statement is wrong:

"I am made of "x", therefore the universe is made of "x"" 

Do you?

Now, what extra assumption do you think materialism makes, again, and why do you think it would matter if it did?

You make the assumption that not only do things exist, they exist in a particular fashion-- and not only this, but that their existence as you see it is fundamental to reality. It's quite the impressive chain of assumptions, actually, since you have no direct interaction with anything but your own mind.

As an example, if the question is asked "Why does gravity exist".  I could give you an explanation that assumes a great many things regarding gravitons, or I could simply say "waffles".  Do you lean towards waffles as an explanation for gravity on the grounds that it makes fewer assumptions?

No, I lean toward the idea that gravity, and all other forces, are the expression of immaterial principles, as are QM particles and the objects which supervene on them.

But if I have to choose only between waffles and gravitons, I'd probably choose waffles, because if we are making stuff up, it might as well be delicious stuff.