It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Materialism vs Idealism

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2021 @ 03:46 PM
link   
The current dominating metaphysical belief is that beyond our perceptions, there is something that we call matter, even though the only evidence that we have to prove the existence of this matter is our perception. Even quantum physics tells us beyond a doubt that before observation, there is nothing, or rather there is a soup of potentialities, which only exists in the form of abstract mathematics. So, materialism first makes an incredible assumption about the existence of matter as something that exists in itself and by itself and is totally independent of our mental experience, but it goes even further than that and it says that our consciousness, our mental experiences are born out of this matter, even though matter only exists as an experience inside our consciousness.

We postulate the existence of something that doesn't really exist, and then we even say that our own consciousness comes from that non existent thing.
Like a painter who would paint his own portrait, then would forget about himself and would say, pointing his finger at the portrait : "This is me, I am this portrait". We say that matter somehow gives rise to consciousness, even though the only thing we are 100% sure about, is the existence of consciousness, of mental experience.

Idealism states that everything is part of the mental experience, that only experience exists. It states that the universe is one universal consciousness, or mind, and that the world around us is the mental process of this universal mind. We humans, as seemingly separate minds, are instances of this universal mind, or disassociated minds. There is a boundary between my mind and yours, I can't read your mind and you can't read mine, because we have been disassociated from the universal mind, but we are instances of that same and unique universal mind.

Then there is the argument of parsimony, or Occam's razor : whichever theory explains everything and is the simplest, must be taken more seriously. Materialism states that there are 2 ontological categories : mind and matter, even though it leads to what is called the 'hard problem of consciousness' : the impossibility to explain how matter gives rises to consciousness, or how electrochemical activity in the brain gives rises to the red color, the smell of garlic or the taste of vanilla. Idealism states that there is only one ontological category : mind.

It feels to me that materialism is just a huge mistake, a gigantic misunderstanding. It forces us to invent absurd theories that completely destroy the principle of parsimony, like for example the many worlds theory, which implies that all possible outcomes of quantum measurements are physically realized in some "world" or universe, which is basically saying that with each nanosecond that is passing, billions over billions of universes are created. And we invent such theories so that we can keep intact the belief that matter is something that really exists and is independent from mental experience..



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: gosseyn

Thanks for creating this OP.



... And we invent such theories so that we can keep intact the belief that matter is something that really exists and is independent from mental experience.. ...


Are you aware of any theories that we haven't invented ?

Perhaps it's like a massive improv, and we're just making 'everything' up as we go ?




posted on May, 16 2021 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: gosseyn
Hermetics colored by whichever way you want to spell Kabbalah has been the best understanding I've run into.



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nothin
a reply to: gosseyn

Thanks for creating this OP.



... And we invent such theories so that we can keep intact the belief that matter is something that really exists and is independent from mental experience.. ...


Are you aware of any theories that we haven't invented ?

Perhaps it's like a massive improv, and we're just making 'everything' up as we go ?



There are theories, but there are also givens. Consciousness is a given. Everyone knows what it is to feel something cold, or warm, or what it is to feel the taste of vanilla, or the smell of garlic, or experiencing the red color. This is a given, it is not a theory. Mental experience is everywhere, always, at the beginning and at the end of everything. Idealism says that this thing, mind, which is a given, is all there is, and what we call matter is merely a category of perception. Materialism is mistaking the perceived as something ontologically different than what perceives.
edit on 16-5-2021 by gosseyn because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: gosseyn

Consciousness is a given


Is it really?. Or is it merely one more example of this, ''that the only evidence that we have to prove the existence of this consciousness is our perception



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: gosseyn

Consciousness is a given


Is it really?. Or is it merely one more example of this, ''that the only evidence that we have to prove the existence of this consciousness is our perception


Well yes, perception, consciousness, mind, for me these are different names to talk about the same thing. Would you deny that you experience mental states ?



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 05:44 PM
link   
In order for this ideology to hold any weight, you would have to demonstrate that consciousness preceded matter. In other words, the universe was thinking before the universe physically existed.



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm
In order for this ideology to hold any weight, you would have to demonstrate that consciousness preceded matter. In other words, the universe was thinking before the universe physically existed.


Consciousness always precedes what is called matter, because without mental experience, there is just nothing. For idealism, there isn't mind on one side and matter on the other, but there is just one ontological category, which is mind, or mental experience, or consciousness, call it as you want. The burden of proof is on materialism to explain how the presumed ontological category that is matter gives rise to another ontological category that is mind. Materialism must explain how electrochemical activity in the brain gives rise to the experience of the red color or the taste of chocolate. On the other hand, idealism doesn't have this problem because it postulates that everything is mind.
edit on 16-5-2021 by gosseyn because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 06:18 PM
link   
And the crazy thing is this : materialism already admits that everything is just in your head. Materialism admits that colors don't really exist outside of your head but are just photons vibrating at different speeds, that sounds don't really exist outside of your head but are just vibrations in the air, that your sense of touch, of smell, of taste, all that is just in your head. The mistake materialism makes is to believe that all these experiences are the product of the brain. Idealism says that the brain is the product of the mind, that the brain is what a mind looks like from outside this mind, its appearance, its image.



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: gosseyn

materialism is rendered moot by entropy.



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 06:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: gosseyn

materialism is rendered moot by entropy.
what do you mean ?



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 07:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: gosseyn

originally posted by: TzarChasm
In order for this ideology to hold any weight, you would have to demonstrate that consciousness preceded matter. In other words, the universe was thinking before the universe physically existed.


Consciousness always precedes what is called matter, because without mental experience, there is just nothing. For idealism, there isn't mind on one side and matter on the other, but there is just one ontological category, which is mind, or mental experience, or consciousness, call it as you want. The burden of proof is on materialism to explain how the presumed ontological category that is matter gives rise to another ontological category that is mind. Materialism must explain how electrochemical activity in the brain gives rise to the experience of the red color or the taste of chocolate. On the other hand, idealism doesn't have this problem because it postulates that everything is mind.


I said you have to demonstrate it. Talking about it isn't demonstration.



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: gosseyn

originally posted by: TzarChasm
In order for this ideology to hold any weight, you would have to demonstrate that consciousness preceded matter. In other words, the universe was thinking before the universe physically existed.


Consciousness always precedes what is called matter, because without mental experience, there is just nothing. For idealism, there isn't mind on one side and matter on the other, but there is just one ontological category, which is mind, or mental experience, or consciousness, call it as you want. The burden of proof is on materialism to explain how the presumed ontological category that is matter gives rise to another ontological category that is mind. Materialism must explain how electrochemical activity in the brain gives rise to the experience of the red color or the taste of chocolate. On the other hand, idealism doesn't have this problem because it postulates that everything is mind.


I said you have to demonstrate it. Talking about it isn't demonstration.


I don't think you understand the discussion.



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: gosseyn

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: gosseyn

originally posted by: TzarChasm
In order for this ideology to hold any weight, you would have to demonstrate that consciousness preceded matter. In other words, the universe was thinking before the universe physically existed.


Consciousness always precedes what is called matter, because without mental experience, there is just nothing. For idealism, there isn't mind on one side and matter on the other, but there is just one ontological category, which is mind, or mental experience, or consciousness, call it as you want. The burden of proof is on materialism to explain how the presumed ontological category that is matter gives rise to another ontological category that is mind. Materialism must explain how electrochemical activity in the brain gives rise to the experience of the red color or the taste of chocolate. On the other hand, idealism doesn't have this problem because it postulates that everything is mind.


I said you have to demonstrate it. Talking about it isn't demonstration.


I don't think you understand the discussion.


What do you think I don't understand?



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: gosseynNo, I do not deny it, rather I question it. I question if there is even a ''me'' to do so. I'm an ''if'' and ''might be'' kind of guy if, that is I am ore might be.

The consciousness from matter vrs the matter from consciousness seems a classic ''chicken or egg'' conundrum, both have astounding minds supporting the superiority of each philosophical thread yet both seem never the twain to meet.

It seems to me that holding with either of those is a continuation of illusion. I try to not fall into either and explore the vague gap between those two positions.



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: gosseyn

This seems like this thread was meant for my avatar.

I can't elevate consciousness to a universal master consciousness.

I can't see it as part of a greater cosmic divine Mind matrix or give it a non-phenomenal existence. I really try, but in the end my view remains quite borderline nihilistic.

Clumped matter producing waves detected on extremely low bands is interesting but without the material inside the skull your perception can't exist to have an existential crisis.

A person with Alzheimer's can no longer live a typical phenomenal existence. Up to and including false sensory perception rooted in prior experience. Likewise with the experience of a schizophrenic. Imaginary enemies to everyone with standard biology.

Simple things like color blindness show green isn't always green is you lack a certain cone. I have to still assume the pigment chlorophyll looks "green" everywhere there is electromagnetism ('visible' light) to go through RGB filters.

The electromagnetic spectrum is not a lie. The Carrington Event can attest to that. Telegraph wires people weren't even looking at sizzled as high energy waves slammed into the Northern Hemisphere.

In my opinion the role of our individual consciousness is to be real time observers of the information (that exists regardless of our cognition) processed through sensory organs and then responded to by our brains, which are prone to dissimenation defect.

Even delays between precognition and action up to 11 seconds dosen't remove the material out of the following.

If I deprive all my senses and start walking I can't escape the solid nature of matter, even those I have no current conception of, when I walk into a wall.

If we are talking solipsism that is the kryptonite.

Here's a cool article with a ton of those "free will" connotations.

futurism.com...
edit on 16-5-2021 by Degradation33 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-5-2021 by Degradation33 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: gosseyn

The solution to correct one extreme can't be another one.
Matter passes the 'exists independently of my mind' test, when I can detect, measure, record it, show it to someone else and it's still the same 'thing'.
And consciousness is way harder to prove and to handle, exactly because it is not matter and does not exist independently of my mind, or at least I can't test and/or prove if it does or not, at this point in time.

I don't think it's an either/or situation, humans are a matter & consciousness system and the question how that relates us with the universe...
42



posted on May, 16 2021 @ 11:03 PM
link   
I think you wrote a well-articulated post. Thank you for that.

I disagree that everything is only a mental experience, as things happen without us there.



posted on May, 17 2021 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

It is interesting that this is repeated often do discard the mind over matter approach, but when there are phenomenons observed and described that don`t fit the matter over mind approach, they chalk the experience of to mental issues.

what`s it going to be?



posted on May, 17 2021 @ 04:32 AM
link   
a reply to: gosseyn

The current dominating metaphysical belief is that beyond our perceptions, there is something that we call matter, even though the only evidence that we have to prove the existence of this matter is our perception.

If all beliefs and theories and words and stories drop away.......there is just what is.

Unnameable, unknowable.......just what's appearing.



The illusion is that there is something separate seeing the appearance.
There is only what is appearing to happen.




top topics



 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join