(May 6, 2013 at 9:04 am)ChadWooters Wrote: This attitude is part of the problem. Dividing the world into two realms, one for the natural world consisting of quantifiable interaction between matter by means of cause and effect. And a second realm of values and ideas restricted to qualifiable mental properties like sensation, intention, and meaning. This Cartesian divide is the convenient fiction behind the scientific method. It intentionally ignores half of the phenomena to focus on natural processes, to the exclusion of mental phenomena. And that's a good thing, but only so long as we recognize that we have installed an artificial barrier. Like the old cliche says, "If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem is a nail."
No one is excluding the "mental phenomena," as you call it. We are simply saying that the lack of understanding of a natural explanation for these phenomena does not mean that we need to leap to a supernatural one. We know that natural mechanisms behind the functions of the brain exist, so until positive evidence is shown that a supernatural mechanism exists, belief in the existence of a supernatural mechanism must be withheld. That is the scientific method.
For example, I am a shoemaker, and I awake in the morning to see that all of my shoes that needed repair have been fixed during the middle of the night. I have absolutely no idea how this happened. I can either speculate that my assistant came in during the night and finished my work, or I can speculate that magical elves floated in from another dimension and repaired the shoes. Now, why should I consider the magic elves explanation?
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
