(February 1, 2015 at 6:44 pm)bennyboy Wrote:Idealism sounds like the math is making the ball fly. Explain in as much detail as possible on how this works, because I don't see understand how information moves, interacts, or has location. The baseball scenerio in idealism terms sounds like "an information packet moving through space, does some math with another information packet to decide where it would move next." And I'm guessing that time and space are real things in idealism and not another packet of information.(February 1, 2015 at 3:16 pm)Surgenator Wrote: Me doing the math isn't what make the ball fly. The ball flies because the bat interacts with the ball. Just because we can use math to calculate how the ball will fly, it doesn't mean the math is making the ball fly.Nobody has asserted otherwise. Why are you arguing this point?
Quote:I disagree that qualia is necessary. I don't believe it even exist. How do you know qualia is an illusion? Just because you experience something that doesn't mean your experiences reflect reality.Quote:I frankly do not see what the problem is. Your brain takes in some sensory information and assosiates it with a memory. The consciousness (a byproduct of the brain) has access to these memories. So whenever you get the a similiar sensory data, the already existing memory makes you feel like you know what it is. This is subjective, because this is only your memory not anyones else.The problem isn't the processing. It's the qualia. There's no good explanation for why physical processing should imply, require, or allow the existence of qualia. Nor is there any plausible mechanism described which would allow the supervenience of qualia on any physical system. In fact, you don't even have the capacity, given a given physical system, to determine IF it is capable of experiencing qualia.
Quote:I'm not claiming we are co-creating anything. I'm pointing out that the source of the idea is not important for its existence like the source of the particle is not important for its existence. My mind is an idea generator yet my ideas do not manifest in reality. A partice generator creates particles in reality observable by all.Quote:We can generate ideas, I do it all the time. These ideas do not manifest in reality unless I get up and impliment them. If ideas is what this reality is made out of, then there shouldn't be a difference between generating ideas in my head vs ideas in reality.Why? That's like saying if matter is what this reality is made out of, there should be no difference between moving your hand and moving the moon. Just because things reduce down to ideas doesn't mean that nothing is different from anything else. Get this point-- idealism is not solipsism. I'm not claiming we are collectively co-creating the universe with our imaginations.
Quote:Never said anything about imagination's limitations. The problem is that the mind can create ideas. If the fundamental element of the universe are ideas, then our imagination can create reality. Like a flashlight creates photons, our mind creates ideas.Quote:In physicalism, my mind cannot create physical objects. So me imagining physical objects have no affect on reality.lol what do you think idealism is? Apparently you haven't read the several posts in which I described what the word means to me.
In idealism, my mind can create ideas. So I can create the idea of balls using my imagination. You couldn't see my created balls because of ...... umm ..... what is preventing you from seeing them?
I'm saying that "under the hood" of the universe, if things reduce down to conceptual relationships that cannot be expressed unambiguously in a space-time framework, then it makes more sense to think of these things as ideas than as physical objects. I've said that QM and the existence of mind make me believe this to be the case. I did not say that we are limited only by our imagination, or that dreams are the same as objective reality, or that anyone needs to balance their Four Psychic Winds.