On naturalism and consciousness

[Surgenator]

But what I've been talking about in my past couple of posts is a model of the universe, GIVEN that we accept that there's an objective framework of which each individual is a part. I think that if you're in the Matrix, and you are a good enough investigator, you'll eventually come to the conclusion that nothing exists but 1s and 0s. And I think that the physical sciences must inevitably discover that at the root of reality, time and space have no meaning, physical rules don't apply, and there's nothing there beyond the ideas we've inferred. QM squirreliness, to me, represents the first scratch in that deconstruction.

And you still haven't shown how concepts can give a physical universe. The Matrix example that you quote doesn't work because the Matrix is still in a physical reality.

Your stating that concepts + their interactions = photon.
I'm stating that concepts + their interactions = illusion. How do I know it creates an illusion? Because I can combine contradictory concepts together without any effect to the observed reality. The contradictory example I provided is the existance and non-existance of God.

---

I'm not saying the mind is incompatible with idealism. I'm saying idealism isn't internally inconsistent. Hense, it's wrong.

First off, I meant to say "I'm saying idealism is internally inconsistent." Wrote it too quickly and didn't double check it.

I sense that you believe that, but I haven't seen an argument that clearly demonstrates it.

Contradictions in your world view. The God existing and not existing.

But when you say physical monism is "internally consistent," what you are really saying is "ideas about a certain class of experience are consistent with each other."

Yes, a model has to be internal consistent to be even considered as a possible reflection of reality.

This coherence of ideas is perfectly compatible with an idealistic view of reality.

Please show it.

As an added bonus, SO ARE coherent moral ideas, experiences about beauty in art, spiritual experiences, etc. Physical monism fails to be useful as soon as you leave that class of experiences from which it arose and for which it is designed.

In physical monism, your base is physical particles and their interactions. Then you have complex interactions. After that, you can build a consciousness. Then, consciousness creates concepts. Then, we get principles. Finally, we get morals.

So what different classes are you talking about. There are different levels of complexity, but that doesn't mean their different from each other.

Also, "fails to be useful" in one area doesn't mean it's wrong. Example, math fails to be useful on an english exam.