(March 2, 2010 at 10:56 am)Eilonnwy Wrote:If a non-material being can interact with a material world, then part of it is material in the first place. It's like saying the 2D world can interact with the 3D world. Something 2D cannot by definition interact with the 3D world, since to do so would involve it extending into three dimensions.(March 1, 2010 at 9:04 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Actually it's a fair point. One cannot be a materialist and then demand evidence of a non-material being. This is why I reject materialism...
Not entirely. If the non-material being is said to interact in the world in a substantial and material way, then we have something to talk about.
If you're talking about non-material and also non-interactive then we really don't have much to talk about anyway.
The reverse (3D to 2D) is fine, since the 3rd dimension is made up of the 2nd dimension plus depth. Greater dimensions can always interact with smaller dimensions, but not the other way around, only because they are made up (partly) of that smaller dimension.
So I dispute that a truly non-material being can interact with the material.
