RE: The Category Error of Scientism
January 28, 2014 at 3:20 pm
(This post was last modified: January 28, 2014 at 3:31 pm by The Reality Salesman01.)
(January 28, 2014 at 2:17 pm)The Reality Salesman Wrote: I honestly don't know how exactly consciousness works, but I don't pretend to know things about magical rabbits and hats as a substitute for my lack of knowledge either. Coincidentally, that's exactly what you're doing when you invoke the concept of immaterial substances as the hat, and consciousness is your rabbit. I see the hat, I see the rabbit, and I don't believe in magic. My intuition tells me there's a natural explanation for it, and yours says it's magic. I'm glad you recognize that there's an interaction problem, but I'm confused as to why you then went from a seemingly sincere admittance to having insufficient evidence to your claim to asserting a solution by means of "source of intentionality". Please expand on this thought while sticking to your dualist view. Keep in mind that as soon as you begin using physical terms, your whole concept falls apart. Even on a quantum level, it is matter that is being talked about. Waves, energy, matter, these are all physical terms. Describe to me this source of pure "intentionality", what are some of it's properties? Spare no detail, I'm very interested in shedding this dogma of materialism that you say I have.
I hope you'll allow me to also copy and paste responses from the same thread.
...and should I assume that I correctly interpreted the part of your position I responded to? You didn't confirm or deny, and I don't know how to proceed. I'd happily offer clarification on what you saw to be conceited, but I think we've got more than enough on our plates at the moment, and I tend to over-eat...
