Dualism

[Tabby]

"The belief that there is a "physical world" and a "spiritual world"."

(I always came to this conclusion when I was...otherwise intoxicated. >_> )

Okay. So, if there WERE a spiritual world, i.e., an afterlife, a place where your soul rests before being reborn, whatever, how would you know? If it wasn't physical, how would you be able to prove that it was there? And if you DID prove it, wouldn't it be then a physical thing?
But, since it isn't physical, wouldn't that mean that it doesn't exist in the first place, not to mention, you would need proof for souls and a whole bunch of other crap.

Indeed, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence!

[Edwardo Piet]

I know someone who seems to believe 'Matter' is separate to 'Mind' because he says how no one has found exactly where consciousness is yet...and he says "How do you know it's even in the brain?"--to paraphrase-- and he says how no one has found where the connection between 'Mind' and 'Matter' is...

But the thing is...just because people apparently haven't found exactly where consciousness is yet doesn't mean it's rational to believe it's non-physical, immaterial - and be a dualist!! Why not wait for the evidence??...And if there never is any evidence - that's not a reason to just go ahead and believe in dualism!! - I mean,if there can't possibly be evidence for God then that doesn't mean you should give up and believe in him!.

Dan Dennett argues that the structures of the brain themselves, competing, is consciousness...the successful competing structures, the 'winners' are the parts that are experienced - as consciousness...and the unsuccessful, the 'losers' (and there's a whole lot more of them) are the unconscious parts...his point is that you don't need to add an extra stage for consciousness where 'consciousness happens'...there's no need to believe that there is some sort of hidden door way to consciousness within the brain.

And since I agree with going with the least complex hypothesis, that's what I currently believe--at least for now-- too. Consciousness doesn't need to be 'kindled' where 'consciousness happens' - there doesn't need to be a 'special place' in the brain for consciousness... So one doesn't need to go looking for 'where mind becomes matter'. Dualism is just stupid - it brooks no argument!! It has no evidence.

EvF

[LEDO]

There is no spiritual world. There is no frame of reference for it. There is no place for it to exist. Please, tell me about your pre-existance before you were born. I seem to have forgotten mine.

There are as many people alive today as ever existed on the planet in its entire history. That would mean on average a person would have one past life, and many would have none.

How does one store thoughts without an organic brain?

[Edwardo Piet]

There is of course, no evidence for the spirtual world whatsoever - there is no evidence that 'matter' is separate from 'mind' - the mind is physical...it's called the brain. Or if you define 'mind' as consciousness..there's no reason to believe it's somehow 'seperate'. Our consciousness is affected when the brain is affected - there's no reason to believe it's seperate from the brain or unphysical or even a non-empirical matter - there's no evidence for Dualism whatsoever.

EvF

[Darwinian]

I feel like playing Devils Advocate, so....

Okay. So, if there WERE a spiritual world, i.e., an afterlife, a place where your soul rests before being reborn, whatever, how would you know? If it wasn't physical, how would you be able to prove that it was there? And if you DID prove it, wouldn't it be then a physical thing?
But, since it isn't physical, wouldn't that mean that it doesn't exist in the first place, not to mention, you would need proof for souls and a whole bunch of other crap.

Indeed, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence!

I'm a big fan of string/M theory. And in my little worldview of things their may be an infinite number of realms where the laws of physics may be so different that they could never make sense from 'our' perspective.

I know someone who seems to believe 'Matter' is separate to 'Mind' because he says how no one has found exactly where consciousness is yet...and he says "How do you know it's even in the brain?"--to paraphrase-- and he says how no one has found where the connection between 'Mind' and 'Matter' is...

This still remains one of the 10 mysteries of the brain, can't remember what the other 9 are..

As is brilliantly demonstrated in the film Surrogate (which was my idea first!!) you think you are wherever you perceive yourself to be.

There is no spiritual world.

Got any evidence for that?

There are as many people alive today as ever existed on the planet in its entire history. That would mean on average a person would have one past life, and many would have none.

It's a big Universe. Who says we all have to live on the Earth?

[Demonaura]

Aw Darwinian beat me too it.

However LEDO would not need evidence to support his disbelief of a spirit world as he is not making a positive claim. Those who claim the existence of this special world must provide the evidence for it's existence.


Now, personally I like to entertain thoughts on the possibility of things like this, going as far a psychic 'powers' being discovered as our brain power increases. Probably from watching too much anime but, that is neither here nor there. However the moment we try to determine even the first details of any supernatural event we dive head first into the realm of myth and speculation, promptly leaving the realm of science and known reality.

[Edwardo Piet]

I know someone who seems to believe 'Matter' is separate to 'Mind' because he says how no one has found exactly where consciousness is yet...and he says "How do you know it's even in the brain?"--to paraphrase-- and he says how no one has found where the connection between 'Mind' and 'Matter' is...

As is brilliantly demonstrated in the film Surrogate (which was my idea first!!) you think you are wherever you perceive yourself to be.

Indeed it is my--at least current--view that like Dan Dennett says...to paraphrase: 'People don't like consciousness being explained if it can be explained as a bag of tricks....but consciousness is a bag of tricks.'

This still remains one of the 10 mysteries of the brain, can't remember what the other 9 are..

It's certainly believed to be a mystery like many people...but I see no reason to treat it anything other than a puzzle...like Dennett says - it's a bunch of tricks. When people did more research on the brain they found no 'centre' for consciousness....and what Dennett argues is when there's competition between different events in the structures of the brain going - why does there need to be a gateway from 'mind' to 'matter'? Why does anything need to "Enter" consciousness? Dennett argues that consciousness is the state of the brain itself - it's not as if another process has to happen. So there's no evidence for 'consciousness happening' - because there doesn't have to be one 'cut-off point' where it happens - consciousness can simply be a 'smear' of the competition in the brain. He says a common phrase tends to be--to paraphrase--"Ok...then what happens?" as in "What next...when does the consciousness come?" - but Dennett argues that consciousness is 'the fame in the brain'...whatever is 'winning'--at the time--is conscious...

To quote from the Wikipedia Article 'Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness' (which is also a book by Dennett):

'The main tenet of "Fame in the Brain" is that consciousness, much like fame, is not the cause, but the aftermath. Dennett asks us to imagine an author whose book has yet to be released, but will result in unimagineable fame. On Tuesday, when the book is to come out, he is scheduled to go on Oprah, be interviewed on the BBC, and likely be nominated for several awards. However, on Monday, an earthquake destroys the entire city of San Francisco. Naturally, all the media hype that would have revolved around this author is drowned in the focus on San Francisco. Dennett asks, can this man be considered "famous"? He says that the man is in fact not famous even though the book that would have made him famous remains unchanged. This is because fame, according to Dennett, is not about the cause of the fame, but about the aftermath: the interviews, the magazine covers, the paparazzi, etc. Consciousness is the same way. In order for something to be considered "conscious," there must be enough correlating neural events that go with it (e.g. memory formation).'

And since I have not seen a refutation to Dennett's argument and indeed no one has 'found' consciousness..I certainly think it's the least complex hypothesis and most rational--at least for now--to believe that indeed there isn't consciousness to be 'found' but the workings of the brain itself--the state of the brain, the 'fame in the brain'--is indeed consciousness..whatever is 'winning', whatever wins over the brain - is conscious. It doesn't need to be 'kindled'. Consciousness is the aftermath.

EvF

[dagda]

Me being a dualist, I thought I would give it a spin. As you have so clearly stated, the 'spiritual' world is not material. This makes it almost impossible to prove with material evidence, hence it is almost impossible to say definitely that the 'spiritual' world does not exist because of a lack of material evidence. Let me give you an example; prove to me that apples exist without showing me a picture of an apple. Kind of hard isn't it? Trying to find material evidence for the spiritual world is kind of like trying to show someone an apple by giving them an orange.

[Tabby]

There is no spiritual world. There is no frame of reference for it. There is no place for it to exist. Please, tell me about your pre-existance before you were born. I seem to have forgotten mine.

There are as many people alive today as ever existed on the planet in its entire history. That would mean on average a person would have one past life, and many would have none.

How does one store thoughts without an organic brain?

LOL
Reincarnation conviently says that you forget your past life...hrmmm....

[Kyuuketsuki]

Me being a dualist, I thought I would give it a spin. As you have so clearly stated, the 'spiritual' world is not material. This makes it almost impossible to prove with material evidence, hence it is almost impossible to say definitely that the 'spiritual' world does not exist because of a lack of material evidence. Let me give you an example; prove to me that apples exist without showing me a picture of an apple. Kind of hard isn't it? Trying to find material evidence for the spiritual world is kind of like trying to show someone an apple by giving them an orange.

OTOH, given that everything we currently understand (by which I mean the explanation is given provisional assent by the vast majority of the scientific and academic community) is supported by some form of demonstrable and verifiable evidence and that nothing (not one shred) of validatable evidence has been demonstrated for anything spiritual in nature, you could also as easily say that the spiritual world is nothing more than mental masturbation.

Kyu