(September 29, 2016 at 10:45 am)Bunburryist Wrote:Actually, I think there is something special about the materialist conception of what we, as beings are – it’s what makes it is so devilishly difficult for people to understand the intrinsic problems with that worldview - and it has nothing to do with abstract philosophical jargon, sense theories, or anything else one can argue logically about. It has to do, rather, with the fact that the materialist conception of us as “living things” in a three dimensional world is the worldview implicit in the way every child learns to think and talk, and the way in which he will continue to think and talk for the rest of his life – even if he becomes a brain scientist. It isn’t something we are “taught,” but rather is the very context in which our thinking develops. You think it takes work to show a person the flaws in a religious view they’ve been raised in? Try showing a person whose very thinking embodies the materialist worldview the flaws in that worldview!
Aren't you a special snowflake. Maybe it's so difficult to find flaws in the materialist worldview because it's one unhinged from all philosophical babble that the entire scope of philosophy itself, in its own worldview of immaterial things, find itself lacking and flawed.
The materialist worldview is, IMO, the most parsimonious view of reality because exactly it doesn't add any extraneous "things", like the idea that something exists only as an "idea" of the any thing.
The problem, however, is the leap of reason from brains with a exceedingly complex neural network writing text on a keyboard, using a computer viewing a LCD screen, communicating that a ratio between a circles circumference with its diameter is "special" somehow. The material is all there is. It's us giving them special meaning, just to make sense of all the complexity of reality. It (concepts, ideas, numbers, language, etc.) has its uses, but don't forget where it's rooted.
