[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 19 KB, 393x377, 59275-0-1434157834.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15206052 No.15206052 [Reply] [Original]

Can /lit/ offer a single author or philsopher who offers a convincing alternative to materialism? Transcendental idealism is a meme. I'm not asking in a snarky "change my mind" way, I'm genuinely looking for a convincing counter argument, preferably one that isn't horribly antiquated.

>> No.15206070

What you want isn’t “arguments”, you want evidence. Look into paranormal phenomena. Read Jorjani’s Prometheus and Atlas.

>> No.15206089

Most contemporary metaphysicians believe in abstract objects.

>> No.15206110
File: 13 KB, 200x308, b9438c400d8e5d4865b77090809ad6a0.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15206110

>>15206052
Not actually an anti-materialism book, but one that convincingly makes spiritual and paranormal phenomena material.

>> No.15206118

>>15206052
1. Spend a few moments trying to imagine the mental phenomenon you experience is just the right atoms bumping into each other in extremely intricate ways.
2. Laugh
3. If that doesn't convince you read material philosophers trying to justify 1. It's mostly evasive nonsense.
Read Searl

>> No.15206121

>>15206070
What? Isn't "evidence" necessarily material?

>> No.15206130

>>15206121
We have material evidence of the immaterial. Read Ian Stevenson

>> No.15206158

>>15206052
LSD

>> No.15206169 [DELETED] 
File: 331 KB, 589x1024, return_to_thule_20200426192745428.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15206169

>>15206052

>> No.15206437

>>15206118

> Read Searl

Don't drop just the last name of some literal who quack, at least give me a specific book.

>> No.15206488

>>15206052
Matter is an abstraction of your experience. Once you get that there's no coming back to materialism

>> No.15206500

>>15206121
the categories of material/immaterial themselves need to be called into question, which he does in the book.

>> No.15206520

>>15206488

> If I stand in front of a train and close my eyes it won't hit me

>> No.15206534
File: 21 KB, 400x400, 14515151.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15206534

>>15206052

>> No.15206538
File: 70 KB, 305x357, 1566167647422.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15206538

>>15206437
>searle
>literal who quack

>> No.15206541
File: 2 KB, 92x125, 1581823280261s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15206541

>>15206052
Guenon pbuh

>> No.15206554

>>15206541
i always add a nice airy exhalation at the end of pbuh...peebuhhhhh

>> No.15206574

The only proof of your existence is the fact that you're thinking
Read Meditations

>> No.15206706

>>15206574

This is some reddit tier shit, c'mon now.

>> No.15206734
File: 156 KB, 639x904, yaya.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15206734

>> No.15208241

>>15206052
Read these guys:
Plato
Aristotle
Plotinus
Iamblichus
Proclus
Damascius
Origen
Clement of Alexandria
St. Maximus
St. John of Damascus
Al-Farabi
Avicenna
Maimonides
Avicebron
Adi Shankara
Marsilio Ficino
Giovann Mirandola
Jakob Bohme
Giordano Bruno
Meister Eckhart
If nothing here sticks and you don't buy Kant, then stick to materialism.

>> No.15208585

>>15206052
First define what you mean by materialism.

>> No.15208601

>>15208241
What about Hegel or the existentialists?

>> No.15208654

>>15206052
Do you mean getting rid of your consumerist tendencies or in a more philosophical way?

>> No.15208661

>>15206158
nice

>> No.15208673

>>15206706
No, it isn't
Taking your sense-perceptions at face value is reddit

>> No.15208679

>>15206520
Ohhh YOU didn't get it. Outed as retard

>> No.15209414

>>15208673
Based

>> No.15209437

>>15208654
Not OP but presumably in philosophical way because he specified something which would have the same effect as transcendental idealism to accept.

>> No.15209862

>>15209437
But in which philosophical way? Materialism is a very broad term.

>> No.15210304

>>15208601
Hegel and Schelling are good but I wanted to give a list of none German idealists since OP specifically mentioned not liking Kant.

>> No.15210314

>>15206052
Evola.

>> No.15210363

>>15206052
Quine is an immanent realist but I personally think metaphysical realism is perfectly correct

>> No.15210500

>>15206052
The existence of consciousness is proof enough that any materialism worthy of the name is bunk. Any attempts to reconcile materialism with consiousness cede ground to either property dualism or substance dualism.

>> No.15210601

>>15206118
>>15206437
John Searle. the most influential philosopher of mind in the last 40 years. Philosophy of mind is not a buzzphrase, but a technical term for the study of ontology of mind's relationship with body. I can't tell you where to start, as all I have read by him is the "Chinese Room" and "Is the Brain's Mind a Computer Program?"

>> No.15211362

>>15206706
>reddit tier shit
The website best known for obnoxious materialists who worship empiricist science?

>> No.15211411

>>15206052
What do you mean by materialism?
But the Philosophy of Organism. Any other answer you will get in this thread is bunk idealism and hack spiritualism which should be thrown in the garbage.

>> No.15211590
File: 2.82 MB, 540x300, 1581541208503.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15211590

>>15206052
Christianity

>> No.15212498
File: 586 KB, 592x592, 1516047391248.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15212498

>>15210601
Is Searle's chinese room still the best thot experiment philosophy of mind has to offer?