[Ethos_]

Don you keep saying "in this life at least". You have religion then ?.
no wonder you cant see the wood for the trees.

Exactly Grimbo,.......He has a spiritual agenda. And the minute anyone begins to agree with his absurd assertions, about consciousness somehow transcending the material brain, he'll begin to associate it with his religious belief system.

Brain activity equals consciousness.
Without brain activity, no consciousness.

Maybe he should start referring to his position as SPIRTUIAL AWARENESS instead of consciousness. He'll have to disassociate the brain from his theory if he's going to be the least bit consistent. In any case, I think that's where he is ultimately headed anyway.

[DonQuichotte (OP)]

For science to be liberated from materialism you need to provide proof.
I am sure science would love a new branch, but science is not going to
accept you theory just on your faith in it .

Well, you already answered your own words : materialism is just a false conception of nature , just a 19th century outdated and superseded world view that was built on the fundamentally incorrect classical physics , just a philosophy ....just a  belief = unfalsifiable = unscientific, and hence its 'scientific world view " is also false , as a result , that's why science must be liberated from materialism that's no science , even though materialism has been taken for granted as science , as the 'scientific world view ", for so long now, without question .

Otherwise , try to prove to me that reality is just material or physical then , as materialism, and hence as its 'scientific world view ", and therefore as all sciences for that matter have been assuming reality to be,thanks to materialism thus  .

Deal ?

If you think or rather believe that reality is just material or physical, then try to prove that "empirical fact " , or rather that materialist core belief assumption to be "true" then .

Ok? Make my day then .........

If you think that this is just a religiously motivated thing , you're totally wrong about that : i just wanna make you realise the undeniable fact that materialism is false ,and hence the current "scientific world view " is also false = i just would love to see science delivered from that false materialist dogmatic secular religion in science ,that has been taken for granted as science , as the 'scientific world view ". for so long now, since the 19th century at least , thanks to materialism , as many atheists and other non-religious people would love to see science get rid of its false materialist conception of nature or meta-paradigm .
A revolutionary and radical meta-paradigm shift, not just a paradigm shift , is hardly needed to deliver science from materialism , and that will be triggering a major scientific revolution, soon enough = inevitable = just a matter of ...time ......

[Ethos_]

Nevermind what i do happen to believe in

That's right, you'll bring that up later. And BTW, your position is nothing but belief, no facts and no evidence. I think they call that FAITH.

[DonQuichotte (OP)]

Don you keep saying "in this life at least". You have religion then ?.
no wonder you cant see the wood for the trees.

Exactly Grimbo,.......He has a spiritual agenda. And the minute anyone begins to agree with his absurd assertions, about consciousness somehow transcending the material brain, he'll begin to associate it with his religious belief system.

Don't be silly as to take that self-refuting and self-defeating religious agenda accusations out of  the closet again : that's not my motivation, once again : i am so pro-science that i would love to see it get rid of its false materialism,the latter that has been taken for granted as the 'scientific world view "  , as many atheists such as Thomas Nagel and others do whose works i have been extensively quoting all along ....

Brain activity equals consciousness.
Without brain activity, no consciousness.

Yeah, right : the tv set or radio device do also create or are their respectively received signals images and sounds ,or their own created received broadcaststs : Obama must be living inside of the tv sets ,as Hitler was living inside of the radio haha

Maybe he should start referring to his position as SPIRTUIAL AWARENESS instead of consciousness. He'll have to disassociate the brain from his theory if he's going to be the least bit consistent. In any case, I think that's where he is ultimately headed anyway.

Consciousness is nothing but its subjective content experiences states ...or qualia that cannot be accounted for by brain activity ,or by physics and chemistry .

Science has not been able so far , for obvious reasons , to link the subjective conscious states and experiences to ...brain activity .

Consciousness that cannot be but non-physical or non-material = irreducible to the physical or to the material ,once again .

[Ethos_]

Consciousness is nothing but its subjective content experiences states ...or qualia that cannot be accounted for by brain activity ,or by physics and chemistry .

Science has not been able so far , for obvious reasons , to link the subjective conscious states and experiences to ...brain activity .

Consciousness that cannot be but non-physical or non-material = irreducible to the physical or to the material ,once again .

You're preaching to the choir Don.............., a membership of one. I think you're singing solo Don......................and off key I might add.

[DonQuichotte (OP)]

Consciousness is nothing but its subjective content experiences states ...or qualia that cannot be accounted for by brain activity ,or by physics and chemistry .

Science has not been able so far , for obvious reasons , to link the subjective conscious states and experiences to ...brain activity .

Consciousness that cannot be but non-physical or non-material = irreducible to the physical or to the material ,once again .

You're preaching to the choir Don.............., a membership of one. I think you're singing solo Don......................and off key I might add.

Ethos : don't be silly , please : try to read my simple words , they are so simple and so undeniable that you cannot misunderstand them ,can you ?
Try to answer that simple question i have been asking you all , all along :
Is reality just material or physical ? Can science be metaphysically not neutral as to pretend to know the nature of reality as a whole as such already , science that's still a relatively young effective and unparalled methodic adventurer like no other ,science which has been  confined  to just the materialist false version of reality , by making science "believe" that that's  all what there is to reality ,while such a great  young  adventurer such as science should be in fact totally free in exploring all parts of reality  with which science can deal empirically,instead of being confined to just a single part of reality . ..............

Get that ? How ,on earth, can you not ?

Hopeless ...

Ciao .

[dlorde]

For science to be liberated from materialism you need to provide proof.
I am sure science would love a new branch, but science is not going to
accept you theory just on your faith in it .

You're wasting your time; we've been over this many times, why he's attacking a straw man, why he has the burden of proof, the lack of evidence for the immaterial, the evidence consciousness is a material process, etc., etc.

He has failed to absorb any of it, or is being deliberately obtuse. He won't provide intelligent argument or explanation, just obsessively repeats his anti-materialist dogma, interspersed with insult-laden rants and chapters of copyright material from the speculative fringe.

Boring.

[Ethos_]

Hopeless ...

In a nutshell!

[DonQuichotte (OP)]

For science to be liberated from materialism you need to provide proof.
I am sure science would love a new branch, but science is not going to
accept you theory just on your faith in it .

You're wasting your time; we've been over this many times, why he's attacking a straw man, why he has the burden of proof, the lack of evidence for the immaterial, the evidence consciousness is a material process, etc., etc.

He has failed to absorb any of it, or is being deliberately obtuse. He won't provide intelligent argument or explanation, just obsessively repeats his anti-materialist dogma, interspersed with insult-laden rants and chapters of copyright material from the speculative fringe.

Boring.

Yeah, right : you cannot address my legetimate raised  issues ,so, it's very convenient to say what you have been saying here above,in order to avoid addressing those issues = self-defeating or self-refuting exit strategy : way to go , scientist: boring indeed .
I did deliver the arguments concerning the undeniable falsehood of materialism , mainly via relevant excerpts of top books on the subject .
That you choose deliberately to ignore all that , is your problem .
You have not been delivering any kind of evidence proving consciousness to be just a biological process = you cannot , simply because science is not yet able to tackle the issue or hard problem of consciousness , simply because science is still materialist , and simply because there are not falsifiable theories of consciousness out there yet .
So, what makes you think that consciousness is just a biological process then, since science cannot deliver yet any conclusive evidence regarding the latter materialist claim .

Furthermore , you cannot or you do not want to try to deliver the oxtraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims of materialism regarding the nature of reality : the burden  of proof is thus all yours to address ,since the materialist false conception of nature has been taken for granted by all of you ,without question , as the "scientific world view " ,so.

In other words :
"The mind is in the brain, or the mind is just brain activity " is just an extension of the materialist false "all is matter ,including the mind " version of reality ,no empirical fact .

Amazing how materialist dogmatic beliefs have been taken for granted as 'empirical facts " , even by some of the most intelligent people on this planet , a fact which proves that cognitive intelligence is not the highest form of human intelligence , not even remotely close thus .

Materialists and their followers cannot be but guilty of confirmation and other biases thus , by refusing stubbornly to face the undeniable falsehood of their materialist a -priori held beliefs , they have been taking for granted as 'empirical facts ", even in the face of counter -arguments such as the ones  that have been delivered by my tons of posted material and excerpts on the subject .

[Ethos_]

I did deliver the arguments concerning the undeniable falsehood of materialism , mainly via relevant excerpts of top books on the subject .

Not evidence,............nothing but vague speculations.

[cheryl j]

(There is , once again, plenty of evidence and arguments contained in my posted excerpts ,for everybody to see,not just speculations or opinions views,regarding the undeniable falsehood  and absurdity  of the materialist mainstream "scientific world view "  .)

There's lots of argument in your excerpts, but very little evidence, and almost none of it empirical or from experiments. The vast majority is criticism of materialism for not immediately providing answers to everything, and the leap in logic that therefore "materialism is false"

The materialist mainstream "scientific world view " has been assuming , for so long now , that reality is just material or physical, including the mind

It doesn't assume that. It just requires evidence from anyone who claims a supernatural or immaterial process is a mechanism for why something happens. It requires the same thing from anyone claiming a new, unknown material mechanism, so there is no double standard.

the 'scientific world view " has been taking that false assumption, or rather false materialist conception of nature for granted as an 'empirical fact " so far :

The only thing that is an "empirical fact" are the individual, specific empirical facts and observations from individual, specific reproducible experiments.
Deliver your experimental evidence and that evidence will be an empirical fact as well.

The burden of proof is yours to address then.............

No, it's not. Again, you're attributing to others a claim  that was never made, and demanding that they defend an argument that they haven't put forth.

In other words :

Has science ever proved the materialist "fact ", or rather the materialist core belief assumption to be "true ", regarding the nature of reality ?

Is the materialist "all is matter ,including the mind " mainstream 'scientific world view " 's version of reality an empirical fact then ? Is reality just material or physical as all sciences have been assuming it to be , since the 19th century at least ?

Can you   try to answer  just that ?

No, because your request is impossible and illogical. The only way to prove that "all is matter" is to prove that nothing is, was, or ever will be, or even could be, immaterial. Again, you are asking people to prove an infinite number of propositions an infinite number of times.

Science has also not proved that ancient astronauts didn't visit the earth and provide technological assistance to ancient cultures, help build the pyramids. Do you believe this? Why or why not? Do you believe Q-ray ion bracelets relieve pain from arthritis? Do you believe in homeopathic medicine? Chakra readings? Reiki? Channeling the spirits of the dead? L Ron Hubbard's Scientology? Creationism? Torsion fields? Numerology? Pyramidology? Crystal healing? Alien abductions?

Since you don't require empirical evidence to support your own claims or theories, and since materialist scientific world view is obviously false and based on a misconception of nature, and its findings can't be trusted, there is no reason why you shouldn't accept any and all of the above things as equally valid ideas.

[Ethos_]

Science has also not proved that ancient astronauts didn't visit the earth and provide technological assistance to ancient cultures, help build the pyramids. Do you believe this? Why or why not? Do you believe Q-ray ion bracelets relieve pain from arthritis? Do you believe in homeopathic medicine? Chakra readings? Reiki? Channeling the spirits of the dead? L Ron Hubbard's Scientology? Creationism? Torsion fields? Numerology? Pyramidology? Crystal healing? Alien abductions?

Since you don't require empirical evidence to support your own claims or theories, and since materialist scientific world view is obviously false and based on a misconception of nature, and its findings can't be trusted, there is no reason why you shouldn't accept any and all of the above things as equally valid ideas.

It's called: "naïve"..........."credulous"........Believing something too readily. Accepting a belief by faith without sufficient evidence.
Don's personality in a nutshell!

[Grimbo1]

By Don's logic magic, astrology, religion, etc. are also science
and its up to science to disproof them.
He does not understand the scientific process at all.

[Ethos_]

By Don's logic magic, astrology, religion, etc. are also science
and its up to science to disproof them.
He does not understand the scientific process at all.

Exactamoondo.....................

[cheryl j]

Nevermind what i do happen to believe in ,that's neither my motivation nor my 'argument " in relation to trying to make you realise the undeniable falshood of the materialist mainstream 'scientific world view ",  i just do keep my own beliefs outside of science ,

When Supercryptid and Ethos have said they separate their spiritual beliefs from science, you attack them for being "paradoxical." Why is it reasonable and acceptable when you do this, but no one else?

in total contrast with materialism as a dogmatic unfalsifiable false secular religion in science that has been imposing itself as the "scientific world view ".

How is the requirement for evidence a form of secular religion?

But , fact is , materialism goes beyond science ,beyond its method ,beyond its realm and jurisdiction , by assuming that reality is just physical or material .

How is requiring evidence going beyond the realm and jurisdiction of science?

Worse : that false materialist world view has been the 'scientific world view " = all sciences have been materialist ,in the above mentioned sense thus , while science should be neither materialist nor otherwise .
Science should be metaphysically neutral thus

How is simply requiring evidence, whether it is for a immaterial mechanism or an unknown material mechanism, not metaphysically neutral?

[DonQuichotte (OP)]

By Don's logic magic, astrology, religion, etc. are also science
and its up to science to disproof them.
He does not understand the scientific process at all.

Non-sense : you have just landed , Eagle ,so, you're not in a position ,and you have no right to utter such utter non-sense,simply because you have missed a lot here that's been going on in this and other threads as well  .
You might be the one who does need to improve your own  conception of science , i guess .
I might help you achieve just the latter ....just give me a sign then , and i will be delivering .
Since you cannot all but confuse materialism with science , you're the ones who are in urgent need of improving your own conceptions of the nature of science .
I might call my friend Karl Popper in his own grave to tell you what science exactly is , and what is it not as well .

[Ethos_]

By Don's logic magic, astrology, religion, etc. are also science
and its up to science to disproof them.
He does not understand the scientific process at all.

Non-sense : you have just landed , Eagle ,so, you're not in a position ,and you have no right to utter such utter non-sense,simply because you have missed a lot here that's been going on in this and other threads as well  .
You might be the one who does need to improve your own  conception of science , i guess .

Talking down to a new member simply out of an over grown ego is worthy of banishment in my humble opinion. I think an administrator should be advised.

[Grimbo1]

Thanks Ethos but I can look after my self ok.
Don
I may not have been here long but I have read this thread.
Your right that Science should be metaphysically neutral but what you don't seem to understand
is that it is neutral. the problem is no body has ever demonstrated anything non  materialistic.
call your friend Karl Popper in his grave. If he answers get him on here, then you will have a convert.

[DonQuichotte (OP)]

(There is , once again, plenty of evidence and arguments contained in my posted excerpts ,for everybody to see,not just speculations or opinions views,regarding the undeniable falsehood  and absurdity  of the materialist mainstream "scientific world view "  .)

There's lots of argument in your excerpts, but very little evidence, and almost none of it empirical or from experiments. The vast majority is criticism of materialism for not immediately providing answers to everything, and the leap in logic that therefore "materialism is false"

Wrong , lady :
Materialism is false , not because it cannot explain 'everything " (materialism is just a false conception of nature without any explanatory power whatsoever in fact .)  , but mainly because it cannot account for consciousness that's irreducible to the physical .
My tons of posted material and excerpts on the subject do say why , relatively speaking , you just don't listen to them .
(Not to mention that you should try as well not to take that promissory messianic materialism argument " out of the closet , in the sense that materialism will be 'explaining " tomorrow what it cannot "explain" today,simply because materialism has no explanatory power whatsoever , once again ,due to the fact that materialism is just a belief ,no science  .)
Not to mention the fact that the false materialist world view has been equated with "the scientific world view " ,while materialism is just a belief = unfalsifiable = unscientific ,despite its scientific claims .

Otherwise , try to deliver the extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims of materialism, regarding the nature of reality then .

As a belief= unfalsifiable = unscientific ,as all beliefs are by the way  , as a belief thus ,materialism goes beyond science , beyond its scientific method thus , beyond science's jurisdiction and realm, by pretending to know the nature of reality already

The materialist mainstream "scientific world view " has been assuming , for so long now , that reality is just material or physical, including the mind

It doesn't assume that. It just requires evidence from anyone who claims a supernatural or immaterial process is a mechanism for why something happens. It requires the same thing from anyone claiming a new, unknown material mechanism, so there is no double standard.

You simply cannot deny the undeniable fact that all sciences for that matter have been dominated by the materialist meta-paradigm ,the latter that has been taken for granted as "the scientific world view " .
So, all sciences for that matter have been assuming that reality is just material or physical, that matter is the only reality , thanks to materialism .

the 'scientific world view " has been taking that false assumption, or rather false materialist conception of nature for granted as an 'empirical fact " so far :

The only thing that is an "empirical fact" are the individual, specific empirical facts and observations from individual, specific reproducible experiments.
Deliver your experimental evidence and that evidence will be an empirical fact as well.

What extraordinary evidence has materialism been delivering so far then, for its extraordinary claims -"empirical facts " ,regarding the nature of reality ?,since materialism gets equated with "the scientific world view " .

The burden of proof is yours to address then.............

No, it's not. Again, you're attributing to others a claim  that was never made, and demanding that they defend an argument that they haven't put forth.

Once again , the current "scientific world view ' has been just the materialist 'all is matter ,including the mind " version of reality : what makes it so 'scientific " then ?
The burden of proof is yours to address thus , as self-declared materialists .

In other words :

Has science ever proved the materialist "fact ", or rather the materialist core belief assumption to be "true ", regarding the nature of reality ?

Is the materialist "all is matter ,including the mind " mainstream 'scientific world view " 's version of reality an empirical fact then ? Is reality just material or physical as all sciences have been assuming it to be , since the 19th century at least ?

Can you   try to answer  just that ?

No, because your request is impossible and illogical. The only way to prove that "all is matter" is to prove that nothing is, was, or ever will be, or even could be, immaterial. Again, you are asking people to prove an infinite number of propositions an infinite number of times.

Once again , the materialist "all is matter ,including the mind " version of reality = the current 'scientific world view " : what makes it so "scientific " then ? Why has materialism as just a world view, a belief , a philosophy .....been taken for granted as  the 'scientific world view " ?

Science has also not proved that ancient astronauts didn't visit the earth and provide technological assistance to ancient cultures, help build the pyramids. Do you believe this? Why or why not? Do you believe Q-ray ion bracelets relieve pain from arthritis? Do you believe in homeopathic medicine? Chakra readings? Reiki? Channeling the spirits of the dead? L Ron Hubbard's Scientology? Creationism? Torsion fields? Numerology? Pyramidology? Crystal healing? Alien abductions?

See above .
 What has this talk of yours to do with what i have been saying ?

Since you don't require empirical evidence to support your own claims or theories, and since materialist scientific world view is obviously false and based on a misconception of nature, and its findings can't be trusted, there is no reason why you shouldn't accept any and all of the above things as equally valid ideas.

Materialism is just a false world view , without any explanatory power whatsoever , no science , even though science has been materialist , in the above mentioned sense at least : why do you keep on confusing materialism with science then ?

Science has been extremely suuccessful only and exclusively thanks to its own effective and unparalleled scientific method , materialism has been having absolutely nothing to do with all that , once again .

Since materialism is false , mainly because it cannot account for consciousness, then, we should be looking for non-materialist falsifiable theories of consciousness : there are none today ,but that does not mean there will be none tomorrow .

The bottom line is thus :
Science must be liberated from its own dogmatic materialist belief system ,in order to be able to progress .................

Thanks, appreciate indeed , lady .
Nice weekend ,and a happy non-materialist haha new year to you and to all your beloved ones as well .

[Ethos_]

Don

call your friend Karl Popper in his grave. If he answers get him on here, then you will have a convert.

Giving the slightest credibility to Don's view of the scientific method, he might just believe in Popper's resurrection?

That eventuality would convert many of us.......................