0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Only religious idealism is true = reality is both matter and mind , the latter that's irreducible to the physical or to the material ,once again = that's the only conception of nature out there that does make sense in fact .
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 11/12/2013 17:27:44Quote from: alancalverd on 11/12/2013 17:20:08Quote from: DonQuichotte on 11/12/2013 17:04:19thanks to consciousness mainly Please define this remarkable stuff you keep talking about. What does it do?Please , do some introspection : look within yourself : get in touch with your self ,or with your own subjective inner life .From which I can only deduce that you have no idea what you are talking about, and your arguments and assertions are therefore worthless at best or invalid at worst. How sad to waste your considerable intellect on such a pointless exercise.
Quote from: alancalverd on 11/12/2013 17:20:08Quote from: DonQuichotte on 11/12/2013 17:04:19thanks to consciousness mainly Please define this remarkable stuff you keep talking about. What does it do?Please , do some introspection : look within yourself : get in touch with your self ,or with your own subjective inner life .
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 11/12/2013 17:04:19thanks to consciousness mainly Please define this remarkable stuff you keep talking about. What does it do?
thanks to consciousness mainly
I am too outraged,angry and appaled by your unscientific denials and attitudes right now to be able to continue this discussion .So, i am leaving this forum ,right now , in order to cool down , and i will return to this forum only when i would see you all abandoning your unscientific and irrational accusations and materialist inquisitions.Best wishes .Ciao .
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 04/12/2013 18:00:56Only religious idealism is true = reality is both matter and mind , the latter that's irreducible to the physical or to the material ,once again = that's the only conception of nature out there that does make sense in fact ."Only religious idealism is true"..........Another example of your fight against the secular. One does not need to abandon rational science to have faith. And, to attack one or the other is an attempt to defeat any chance for their co-existence. I value good science and my faith. I personally choose to preserve them both.
But ,the main issue here is that materialism is false , so, we should be looking for non-materialist falsifiable theories of consciousness .To continue trying to defend the indefensible materialism, by trying to refute dualism or other non-materialist theories of nature , can't make the fact go away that materialism is false , and hence materialism must be rejected by all sciences .
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 11/12/2013 18:19:57I am too outraged,angry and appaled by your unscientific denials and attitudes right now to be able to continue this discussion .So, i am leaving this forum ,right now , in order to cool down , and i will return to this forum only when i would see you all abandoning your unscientific and irrational accusations and materialist inquisitions.Best wishes .Ciao .That was remarkably fast, so have you calmed down yet?
Quote from: DonQuichotte link=topic=48746.msg426381#msg426381 But ,the main issue here is that materialism is false , so, we should be looking for non-materialist falsifiable theories of consciousness .To continue trying to defend the indefensible materialism, by trying to refute dualism or other non-materialist theories of nature , can't make the fact go away that materialism is false , and hence materialism must be rejected by all sciences .That might seem like the "main issue" to you, but that is your take on it. Other people might be interested in consciousness for other reasons, just interested in the topic itself, and their comments are not necessarily a "distraction" or irrelevant - consciousness was, after all, the original title of the thread, not "materialism is false."
What's more, asking you to support your claims or ideas with evidence is not equivalent to defending materialism. You would be expected to provide evidence, even if you were on a forum with just other dualists or believers in the immaterial, in order to support your particular version of it.
Besides : I meant religious dualism in fact : i am entiteld to hold that opinion or belief of mine , but i do not impose it as the 'scientific world view "
Consciousness is the self , or self-identity , the soul or whatever .That there still can be no clear definition out there of consciousness
I was just teasing dlorde by calling him silly, since he implies that since there are still no falsifiable non-materialist theories of consciousness out there yet ,there will be none tomorrow, and hence materialism must be not false .
My business as a scientist is to answer questions, not to guess what the questioner might be thinking about. And if you start the conversation by saying "you cannot possibly answer this question, or if you do, I won't believe you" then I dismiss you as a timewaster.
Besides : I meant religious dualism in fact : i am entiteld to hold that opinion or belief of mine , but i do not impose it as the 'scientific world view " ,
None can be more guilty of confirmation bias than materialists
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 11/12/2013 17:39:44None can be more guilty of confirmation bias than materialists Don, only you would claim that anyone who disagrees with you is biased. Do not you not see anything amusing about that?
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 11/12/2013 22:11:42Besides : I meant religious dualism in fact : i am entiteld to hold that opinion or belief of mine , but i do not impose it as the 'scientific world view " ,That's exactly what you've been advocating for the last 51 pages, scientific acceptance of your dualistic view.
Quote from: alancalverd on 12/12/2013 00:04:10My business as a scientist is to answer questions, not to guess what the questioner might be thinking about. And if you start the conversation by saying "you cannot possibly answer this question, or if you do, I won't believe you" then I dismiss you as a timewaster.This is exactly what he has done - he admits he can't explain the consciousness experiments discussed earlier, so he dismisses them as flawed because they contradict his assumptions about materialism which are, in turn, based on his assumptions about consciousness itself, ("materialism is false , mainly thanks to consciousness"). He rejects empirical evidence about consciousness because it contradicts his a-priori assumptions about consciousness...I'm sure he's aware that the gaping hole in that ridiculous circular 'logic' is the unsupported assumption that consciousness cannot be of material origin, but he seems quite unable even to consider the alternative. The truth is, we don't yet know, but Don insists that he does with a vehemence that suggests it's a threat to his entire belief system.
I am entiteld to hold that opinion or belief of mine : i just do not impose it as "the scientific world view ", as materialism has been doing to all sciences for that matter , by imposing its materialist false conception of nature , as the 'scientific world view ".Non-materialists views of the world are unfalsifiable = unscientific , as materialism is by the way , but that does not mean they are all necessarily false , as materialism is .
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 14/12/2013 19:34:00I am entiteld to hold that opinion or belief of mine : i just do not impose it as "the scientific world view ", as materialism has been doing to all sciences for that matter , by imposing its materialist false conception of nature , as the 'scientific world view ".Non-materialists views of the world are unfalsifiable = unscientific , as materialism is by the way , but that does not mean they are all necessarily false , as materialism is .What is the difference between religious dualism and the scientific kind? What specific properties do they share, or what is a property one has that the other does not have?