Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 51 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,177 Year: 5,434/9,624 Month: 459/323 Week: 99/204 Day: 15/26 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   At what point should we look for a non-materialistic explanation?
Teapots&unicorns
Member (Idle past 4999 days)
Posts: 178
Joined: 06-23-2009


Message 20 of 160 (537777)
11-30-2009 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Buzsaw
11-30-2009 1:43 PM


Re: Heaps of simplicity
Hi Buz,
Perhaps if science were to seriously research the possibility of a higher intelligence in the universe than what secularists consider to be observed on earth, science would discover that there are indeed non-materialistic explanations for some observable phenomena.
This would be fundamentally no different than the FSM always changing the results of experiment with his noodly appendage. Can it be true based on what we know? Yes. Does it allow for falsification/innovation/advancement? No.
If you go looking for intelligence, then that's what you'll find. Just because something appears to 'work' better doesn't mean that it is correct.
T&U

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts
I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in
- Dan Foutes
"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Buzsaw, posted 11-30-2009 1:43 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Teapots&unicorns
Member (Idle past 4999 days)
Posts: 178
Joined: 06-23-2009


Message 45 of 160 (537914)
12-01-2009 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Buzsaw
12-01-2009 3:01 PM


Re: Belief
Hi Buzsaw, just realized you were jabbing at my favorite sciences. Can't let that go by.
After all, isn't some mysterious aspects of QM and string theory non-materialistic in nature, inspiring some groups to believe this and others to believe that, relative to a given group's consensus, i.e. belief?
It is 'belief' in the same way that you 'believe' in gravity; you cannot 100% know anything for sure. When speaking of a theory, we usually put 'believe' at the front like "believe in plate tectonics" or "believe in evolution." It's mainly just a way of saying that you support one explanation over another- the facts are there, but the reasons are debatable. (Of course, the better the theory, the more specific the points)
As per your reference of QM and string theory, no, they are not belief in the sense of 'faith.' Most of the things predicted by QM have been observed, and so it is pretty much accepted as fact by all of the physics community. The only discontinuity lies in the cutting edge areas like ST. Because the science is so advanced, then of course there is going to be a some confusion; we simply don't have the right materials to check it out directly yet (at least, not until the LHC is at maximum power). However, what gives these as-yet 'unproven' theories weight is that they fit the model and equations nearly perfectly. I don't claim to be as intelligent about the subject as CD or SG of course, but I'm pretty sure I've got the gist of it.
T&U
Edited by Teapots&unicorns, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Buzsaw, posted 12-01-2009 3:01 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Buzsaw, posted 12-01-2009 6:28 PM Teapots&unicorns has not replied

  
Teapots&unicorns
Member (Idle past 4999 days)
Posts: 178
Joined: 06-23-2009


Message 81 of 160 (538111)
12-03-2009 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by 1.61803
12-03-2009 6:03 PM


Re: You Need to Watch More TV
Hi 1.61,
The link I provided in the post you responded to shows a amputee manipulating a mechanical hand not connected to his body, with his thoughts. psycokinisis or what ever one cares to call it, is still a example of non-material effecting the material world. If thoughts (which are non-material) can effect our physical reality, then this opens up a whole can of worms. I realize one need not invoke the spirit world as a explaination. However simply dismissing something as electrical impulses isn't the answer either. Where did these impulses propagate from, how did the information go from a thought to a machine hand not connected to a body? This to me is amazing.
I think that you're missing the point 1.61; if anything, his moving of the mechanical arm is even more proof of a materialistic explanation. The reason it works is that it uses the same electronic impulses as a normal arm would. If you wanted, you could see exactly how it connects to the brain and receives the signal- it's fascinating stuff.
If you want to advocate a non-materialistic explanation, then how does your theory work? What 'impulse' does your psychokinesis tap into? Is it supported empirically?
Where did these impulses propagate from, how did the information go from a thought to a machine hand not connected to a body? This to me is amazing.
What you are missing is that there is no 'thought' in the sense of 'mind over matter;' there are only electronic impulses that we, as biological machines, 'perceive' as 'thoughts.'
And though the electric hand might not be directly 'connected' to the body, it most likely has electrodes connecting it to the brain in some manner; if not- hey, I don't know everything about neurology!
T&U

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts
I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in
- Dan Foutes
"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by 1.61803, posted 12-03-2009 6:03 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by 1.61803, posted 12-03-2009 6:25 PM Teapots&unicorns has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024