It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Materialism should be labeled a religious belief

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 01:07 PM
reply to post by The GUT

The term ghost in the machine was coined by philosopher Gilbert Ryle to point out the superstitious nature of Cartesian dualism. I mean it's quite ironic to use it as an argument for dualism.

There is no, "Theory of the Mind" as of yet, and one might say that it's the materialists--who by their "handicap"--have limited themselves to ever having one.

This I agree with. Except physicalist theories of mind have accomplished much more than any idealism or dualism theories, which are only good at casting doubt, whether necessary or unnecessary. If we were to gauge what theory has had the greater effect on human advancement, would it be physicalism or idealism?

posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 01:23 PM
reply to post by neoholographic

I think if either are more based in reality as we perceive it, it would be materialism, because at least an atom doesn't stop being an atom after you look away. Can you say the same of truth and love, or honor and courage?

posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 03:31 PM
reply to post by Words

You said:

You have left the evidence, friend, and have merely postulated your own beliefs where others have stood. This is no different than than what you are writing against, and I fear we have entered the realm of double-standards and even superstition.

What??? Of course they're not the same thing.

Materialism admits that it can't know these things and so a leap of faith is required called the Anthropic Principle. The Anthropic Principle is a way of saying Don't ask, Don't tell. Here's more:

In astrophysics and cosmology, the anthropic principle (from Greek anthropos, meaning "human") is the philosophical consideration that observations of the physical Universe must be compatible with the conscious life that observes it. Some proponents of the anthropic principle reason that it explains why the Universe has the age and the fundamental physical constants necessary to accommodate conscious life. As a result, they believe it is unremarkable that the universe's fundamental constants happen to fall within the narrow range thought to be compatible with life.[1]

The strong anthropic principle (SAP) as explained by Barrow and Tipler (see variants) states that this is all the case because the Universe is compelled, in some sense, for conscious life to eventually emerge. Critics of the SAP argue in favor of a weak anthropic principle (WAP) similar to the one defined by Brandon Carter, which states that the universe's ostensible fine tuning is the result of selection bias: i.e., only in a universe capable of eventually supporting life will there be living beings capable of observing any such fine tuning, while a universe less compatible with life will go unbeheld.

This is basically a big nothing burger and shows why materialism requires a leap of faith. It's essentially saying stop asking questions.

Why are there laws of physics?

Where did they come from?

Why does the laws of physics produce planet, stars, moons, life and the constants of nature?

How can random interactions of matter produce mathematical precision down to Planck scales?

Science in the context of materialism can't answer these questions and the Anthropic Principle basically says Don't ask, Don't tell.

The only thing we know that can take information and arrange it in a way to give instructions to build a house or build a car is the mind. Why does the mind understand the universe? Why can we comprehend the instructions that build planets or moons?

The question materialist don't want you to ask is why this arrangement of the laws of physics produce the world that we see? Why does it have meaning that we can comprehend through mathematics?

Materialism doesn't want to ask these questions because materialism can't answer these questions. So they're unremarkable and unimportant. Idealism can begin to answer these questions because you're getting into the area of mind.

How can the arrangement of the laws of physics give us the universe that wee see through random interactions? How can random interactions give us the law of gravity through random interactions? How can random interactions give us Planck constant or Bohr radius? How can it give us such mathematical precision?

Again, materialism can't answer these question so they deem these questions unimportant. Idealism, Biocentrism and even a Quantum Mind can begin to answer these things.

In fact, there's evidence that conscious intention is a force that can make random systems non random. These experiments have been going on for years with things like random number generators and recently seen in the double slit experiment. I have something in front of me called a Mind Lamp and it works using the scientific principles that conscious intention can make random systems non random and it works. I will have friends over and I will tell them if we all start thinking about changing the color of the lamp it will start to change and they're amazed when this happens. This isn't magic, it's science.

edit on 21-3-2014 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)

<< 1   >>

log in