home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.philosophy      Didn't Freud have sex with his mother?      170,335 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 169,545 of 170,335   
   D to All   
   Re: Philosophy hasn't managed to offer a   
   19 Aug 24 19:58:18   
   
   From: nospam@example.net   
      
   On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, someone37 wrote:   
      
   > (Just repostings as there were some formatting issues)   
   >   
   > THESIS   
   >   
   > By a "type 1 physicalist ontology", I mean an account of what exists, in   
   which nothing other than the physical   
   > exists and in which physics is thought of as modelling the rules followed by   
   the physical.   
   >   
   > This thesis is that philosophy hasn't managed to offer a type 1 physicalist   
   ontology which can explain the   
   > evidence through its model.   
   >   
   > DEFENCE OF THESIS   
   >   
   > For the purposes of this thesis when I claim that I am consciously   
   experiencing, I mean it is like something to   
   > be me.   
   >   
   > In this defence I am going to use the term experiences to mean conscious    
   experiences.   
   >   
   > Premise 1: I can tell from my experiences that I am experiencing.   
   >   
   > It could be claimed that through the evidence of the objects each of us   
   experiences, which I will refer to as   
   > experiential objects, there is indirect evidence of a physical. I would   
   disagree, though accept there is evidence   
   > of what I shall refer to as environmental objects.   
   >   
   > With a type 1 physicalist ontology, there might not be physical objects   
   corresponding to those experienced in a   
   > VR type situation. The environmental objects being modelled on a computer.   
      
   Let me introduce you to G.E. Moore   
   (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_is_one_hand). This is a solved   
   problem, and physicalism is supported by a majority of academic   
   philosophers ph.d. and above.   
      
   You got it backwards. You need to instead show what proof there exists   
   that the material world does not exist.   
      
   That would be revolutionary, and you would surely get some kind of Nobel   
   prize.   
      
   In 2500 years no one has succeeded, and the nr of physicalists is   
   steadily increasing.   
      
   Let idealism and skepticism die an honorable death and come join the   
   living. ;)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca