RE: The Case for Atheism
May 9, 2013 at 1:30 pm
(This post was last modified: May 9, 2013 at 1:33 pm by Neo-Scholastic.)
(May 9, 2013 at 12:37 pm)Faith No More Wrote: I can find meaning and value while simultaneously believing they are physical properties of the brain.In this particular case, I do not believe correlation justifies belief in causation, since other factors are at play. For example, my saying, "The brilliant magenta blooms on the crab trees make me happy, " is much different than saying, "a high saturation of photons at n-angstroms correlates with electrical impulses that stimulate the visual cortex resulting in Chad reporting a state he calls happy." Something meaningful gets left out.
While I know of a few ways to deal with the difference between subjective and objective experiences. I do not find them compelling. One theory is nominalism; that these are just different ways of describing the same thing. This seems the most common opinion among AF members. To me that answer begs the question. By saying that subjective/objective distinctions refer to the same aspect of reality is to presume that one description reduces to the other without leaving any form of knowledge behind. But the objective description in no way coveys any of the qualitative aspects of the subjective experience. So I am of the opinion that nominalism fails.