(April 13, 2012 at 9:46 am)Perhaps Wrote:(April 12, 2012 at 10:43 pm)genkaus Wrote: I think the question of "time" should be left alone here, since it would lead the discussion into a whole different direction of relativity, space-time continuum and quantum mechanics.
The concept of numbers is a bad analogy, since numbers are a product of consciousness, i.e. of a conscious mind. However, if your idea of conscious mind is not independent of material reality, then how does it escape causality?
I agree that the topic of time is deep and possibly misleading to the conversation, but numbers have been argued for centuries to exist outside of the conscience. Many mathematicians and metaphysicians argue that maths have been discovered, not created by the conscious mind. Once again, the non-material conscience is dependent on the material world (if the physical world didnt' exist then neither would our consciences) but its non-material nature allows it to interact with causation in the physical realm (free will).
Yes, and the consensus in philosophy has been that these arguments are unsuccessful, failing on the same point that dualistic notions of free will fail, the interface between the material and the non-material. If the non-material affects the material, it would be detectable as a violation of the normal laws of nature; if there is no violation, the non-material, even if it exists, is irrelevant as it does not change the material. Yes, mathematicians and philosophers have tried the same argument with numbers (Godel being a grand example of one such Platonist), however none has constructed a convincing argument. Appealing to one failed argument in an attempt to rescue your current one is just evading the frying pan by jumping into the fire.
(April 13, 2012 at 3:12 pm)Perhaps Wrote: You believe free will is an illusion and that the world is deterministic and material. I believe that there is more outside of ourselves which we must abstract to even attempt to understand. Our perceptions limit our knowledge, and you favor the side of complete knowledge, I favor the side of not-knowing but being inspired by its awe.