[ 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: 419 KB, 500x631, 4ce.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16000523 No.16000523 [Reply] [Original]

If minds are immaterial entities, how can they have any effect on the material world? Is that not a violation of natural law?

>> No.16000525

>>16000523
>>/17thcentury/

>> No.16000544

>>16000525
Explain it to me then, if you're so smart and modern.

>> No.16000552

Fuck descartés, that tail chasing fgt.

>> No.16000555

>>16000544
Dualism doesn't exist. Read Spinoza, Russellian monism, epiphenomenalism, etc

>> No.16000565

>>16000523
Immaterial does not imply unnatural, you are presupposing that the natural is made only of material things

>> No.16000576

>>16000555
what about Kant?

>> No.16000580

>>16000555
Thanks. Can you answer my question now or are you here to posture?
>>16000565
This makes no sense. How can the mind have an effect on material reality, if it is wholly immaterial? A material effect can only have a material cause.

>> No.16000591

>>16000580
You said it is a violation of natural law, but I don't see how that would be the case

>> No.16000593

>>16000576
What about him?

>> No.16000598

>>16000580
>A material effect can only have a material cause.
Nigger it's like a soul what do you want Descartes to say? It's a soul inside the body.

>> No.16000602

>>16000580
I already did. Dualism doesn't exist so your question is ill-posed.

>> No.16000653

They affect it through the material-immaterial gates of course.

>> No.16000657

>>16000591
If you have a desire in your immaterial mind to, for example, lift up your arm, there needs to be some way for this immaterial mind to affect the material realm by causing the neurons to fire in your brain, which in turn will cause the whole sequence of material events leading to the lifting up of your arm. But this mental desire has no force, energy, motion, etc. if it is immaterial, and natural law tells us that such a thing could not produce a material effect in the world.
>>16000602
>Dualism doesn't exist so your question is ill-posed.
The question is conditional. "IF" minds are immaterial entities, "THEN HOW" can they have any effect on the material world. If you don't want to talk about it then fuck off.

>> No.16000660

The final and real redpill is that Descartes was right all along.

>> No.16000686

Via Cartesian coordinates where x is matter and y is mind. Add z for the God if you wish.

>> No.16000693

>>16000653
Doesn't this violate conservation of energy though?

>> No.16000707

the debate is:

>is all matter densified spirit

or

>is all spirit subtle matter

if everything is made of the same thing, it doesn't really matter one way or another

>> No.16000713

>>16000657
Descartes already explained that it is done by pineal gland retard

>> No.16000735

>>16000693
It doesn't if for every additional energy via your mind some other human removes a bit of energy via his.

>> No.16000740

>>16000713
>>16000693

>> No.16000762

>>16000693
Free will would indeed appear to violate conservation of energy. Theoretically, the mind-body interface could be set up so that everything 'cancels out' and energy remains conserved. But there is no reason to expect that without evidence.

>> No.16000769

>>16000523
The material world doesn't actually exist, it's an illusion.

>> No.16000771

>>16000523
matter is layered. reality is not 3D

>> No.16000775

>>16000523
are radio and light waves matter?

>> No.16000779

>>16000707
Which is a pretty dumb debate if you think about it. It's like asking:

>is all ice densified water

or

>is all water liquified ice

>> No.16000782

>>16000775
Any bosonic or fermionic field is matter.

>> No.16000787

>>16000707
Lol, no. That's not 'the debate'.

>> No.16000789

>>16000779
You think with ice and matter with water.

>> No.16000798

>>16000787

what is it then

>> No.16000922

>>16000782
Quantum phsyics has deconstructed matter so much they arrived irrational 2d points and structures that should be impossible according to natural laws, therefore what is matter? Is the material inherently immaterial?

>> No.16000927

>>16000922
arrived at*

>> No.16000933

>>16000922
None of that is true. Matter is very well defined.

>> No.16000946

A reminder that Descartes created his philosophy in a warm stove and died because he moved to the cold country. Take this as a guidance.

>> No.16001005

>>16000933
if it exists, it is matter. if it influences other matter, it matters.

>> No.16001165

>>16001005
What are ideas made of?

>> No.16001194

>>16001165
do numbers exist? no. what exist are reflections, impressions as an organization of matter. does rock know it is rock?

>> No.16001208

>>16001005
Matter is made of fermions and bosons. Causality is implemented via massless bosons.

>> No.16001213

>>16000523
the mind doesn't exist, it's just the collective name we give to the sum of electric stimuli in our brain in response to the outside world, or in other words our experience of our consciousness kept together by memory

>> No.16001262

>>16001194
If numbers don't exist, why do they influence matter?

>> No.16001294

Read Aquinas

>> No.16001385

>>16001213
>sum of electric stimuli in our brain in response to the outside world,
No. You can use a brain scanner to observe the neurological signals in my brain while I listen to Mozart, but you will never be able to access my actual experience of listening to Mozart. At best you will be able to make an inference on the state of my mind, but the actual phenomenological experience of being me and listening to Mozart, while it is very real, will never be accessible to you through empirical observation. This is because the mind, consciousness, is not a material thing like a brain; it is something immaterial.

>> No.16001412
File: 14 KB, 460x345, 51378d28eab8ead007000000.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16001412

>>16000707
>the debate is:
>>is all matter densified spirit
>or
>>is all spirit subtle matter
Implying it isn't being.

>> No.16001428

>>16000707
If gas is a god, then what is plasma?

>> No.16001536

Just read Leibniz. They don’t affect each other

>> No.16001563

>>16001536
>the universe doesn't consist of interacting things
>in fact it consists of infinity of non-interacting things each of which imagines the whole universe with all the other things
That's the majestic worldview. But why not go further? Say, there is an infinity squared of things.

>> No.16001593

>>16000735
>t. solved master-slave dialectics

>> No.16001611

There would have to be some kind of API (application programming interface) middleware between mind and body that translates mental signals into bodily activity. But this interface would have to either be mental or physical, at which point, it raises the question again about how it can link the two. Applying occam's razor, this requires more assumptions than it eliminates, so it isn't a great way of conceptualizing how the mind works.

>> No.16001622

>>16000523
This is the objection everyone raises to Descartes. Even in his lifetime, he sent letters to a woman of royalty trying to defend his argument against this objection. Imo Descartes is preliminary for idealism because he introduces the idea that one is more than one’s body and the body’s will to survive, power etc. But like you said, to posit the soul and the physical body as separate entities means that the soul wouldn’t be able to physically affect the body, unless you accept the faith based claim that a miracle violates the law of conservation of energy and adds additional energy to the world. The less faith based claim is to elevate the physical to the realm of spirit as a manifestation of the metaphysical. You may want to move on to 18th century philosophers like Berkeley for this

>> No.16001644

>>16000523

You're mind isn't immaterial.

>> No.16001711

>>16000523
>If minds are immaterial entities
They aren't. Dualism is nonsense.

>> No.16001733

>>16001262
how?

>> No.16001964

>>16001385
it's just that our knowledge of the brain is rough and our instruments of investigation coarse

>> No.16002236

>>16001213
Explain conciousnes and qualia, stemcel

>> No.16003076

>>16002236
Neither exist and are just passing illusions

>> No.16003530

>>16003076
Maybe for you, brainlet.

>> No.16004653

>>16003530
(You) only exist for an infinitely small period of time before flowing away and the electricity and chemicals in your head create another (You)

>> No.16004753

>>16004653
A sophist, nominalist, atheist, materialist monist, nihilist, panmobilist professor was teaching a class on Heraclitus, known weeper.

“Before the class begins, you must momentarily accept that a new class is beginning every moment, and that once the class is over you will never be able to recall the same class (or infinite number of classes made up of an infinitude of moments, as it were) again.”

At this moment a brave Platonic, Aristotelian, Thomist who full understood that the problem of universals was the central problem of all metaphysics and philosophy and who knew that all modern philosophy was the misguided following of Ockham’s nominalism, stood up and said:

“Everything flows, panta rhei; is that right, professor?”

The amorphous professor smirked quite formlessly and ambiguously replied, “Yes, it’s been approximately 2500 years since Heraclitus established the doctrine that everything flows.”

“Wrong. If everything flows, as you say, then the statement "everything flows” also flows, making it as permanent or established as the proverbial river that was no doubt was made up of babby Heraclitus’ tears, probably because he knew that he would never be a true philosopher.“

The professor was visibly shaken, and dropped his copy of "Wild Ones ft. Sia” by Flo Rida . He stormed out of the room crying those nominalist tears. The same tears that are not the same tears when they leave the eye as when they hit the floor. There is no doubt that at this point our professor, Jacques Derrida, wished he had contemplated the Forms instead of peddling ancient sophisms among a degenerate Academia. He wished so much that he had a self to kill, but he himself had argued that the self is nothing but a transitory event in the great flow of things!

The students applauded and all read the Republic and accepted that everything derives its existence from one universal Form, Αγαθών. The Apology was read several times, and Socrates himself showed up and acted as midwife for all the noble truths that the students’ souls were pregnant with.

Nothing became of the professor because according to his own logic he ceases to be by the end of this post.

Χαλάζι Πλάτωνα.

>> No.16005650

>>16004753

not bad