Regariding the evidence for materialism

[theVOID]

It's not so much ""the theory that physical matter is the only reality" as it is ""the theory that physical matter is the only reality for which we have good reason to believe exists".

Being materialists, I'd have to say you would have the inside rail on the belief that it is the only reality. I'm not really all that interested in what you believe here, as one flying teapot works as well as another, I suppose.

Sure it's a belief, but it's also tentative.

The teapot analogy is inapplicable, Russell's teapot deals with things that are neither demonstrable nor falisfiable, the existence of the 'material' is demonstrable and the claim that "nature is all we have good reason to believe exists" is entirely falsifiable, it just hasn't been falsified to the best of my knowledge.

It very much is the theory that physical matter is all that exists. Ya painted yourselves into that box, so might as well own the damn thing, since you have such faith in it. Myself, I find it an extraordinary claim. Yet, all I got is questions about my proof. I don't have to prove anything. You folks made the claim, so where's the fucking evidence?

That is necessarily false. Unless you want to argue that materialism/naturalism is incompatible with agnosticism my being an agnostic atheist/naturalist means that while I do not believe that a god or any other immaterial objects/entities exist I have no certainty behind that position, thus if it were to be the case that materialism is the positive position that "physical matter is all that exists" I would necessarily be a Gnostic atheist, gods and other immaterial entities would not be possible given your definition of materialism.

So, my agnosticism regarding Atheism/Naturalism/Materialism demonstrates that none of those position are necessarily gnostic and the suffix "all we have good reason to believe" is perfectly valid.

Yes, you should hope and pray because I'm pretty sure space and time got shaken up pretty badly in some kind of equation or something to do with a light beam or some such. I know I heard that somewhere. And matter as we know it, I'm sure I heard that was not at all the case, either. But I'm not a physicist, so I muddle as best I can to keep up with this stuff.

And 'some such you heard somewhere' is weak. I am certain that matter, energy and dimensions exist, they have been irrefutable demonstrated as real phenomenon that exist, Whether or not time is another dimension (B-Theory of time) or simply an illusion of our ability to remember previous states of affairs (A-Theory of time) is entirely besides the point/

Uh, no. The dispute is whether matter is the only really real thing in the universe. It's a binary. There isn't any wiggle room. It either is, or it isn't. Materialists believe that it is. Fine. Where's the evidence?

Like I explained, given my agnosticism my position ends with the knowledge that I don't know. I have been presented with no evidence or compelling argument for the existence of non-physical entities or objects and thus I refrain from further judgement. They may well exist, they may not, the answers to these questions are simply beyond the scope of my current knowledge.

I already showed that your assertions of materialism being necessarily gnostic are false, so if you see any other problems with tentative materialism feel free to raise them.