When you asked if it was possible he was assuming something he reacted as if the assumption that was even possible was wrong and further that your question somehow proved that he couldn’t make assumptions. It was hilarious reading. And we don’t have to go back to Ken for that.
That’s not asking me. It asks will I do it? Maybe I will, maybe I won’t. It’s already proven btw, it has your username and a datestamp on it. Anyone can look it up.
it still uses the ‘it’ word, even after it was specifically asked to explain what the ‘that’ word was in relation to exactly. it, still, after all of these years appears to not be able to recognise when it talking about something, which I am not.
This is so far off topic, I wonder how it has got this far in life.
Materialism does try to find hard answers. Saying “everything is physical” or “God exists” are axioms, but the question is what one does after that.
Materialists provide several theories on how consciousness works. That is what many philosophers do. If a philosopher says something and this something is shown later to not be consistent with the scientific discoveries, we simply say the philosopher was wrong about that. We do not try to spin it and find hidden meaning on the original proposition.
What a religious person does with the “God exists”? We have seen it many times in history. It accepts science up to the point that it does not contradict the “scriptures”. Once the contradiction occurs, it resists completely and claims that science is wrong. Until of course scientific results pile up. When there is no escape, what theists do? They re-interprete the same holy text in order to fit the science. And then they claim again that the scripture is miraculous.
Even if we accept your proposition that consciousness is metaphysical, still you are left with nothing. You have not even tried to understand how it works, because you do not care. “God works in mysterious ways” is your answer.
Materialists do not have holy books. They have no problem rejecting one physical theory in favor of another. They help science to move freely, without restrictions. That is the difference. Now, if you call this approach “divine miracle”, it is your choice of words, not mine.
False Dichotomy: Philosophy is a way to Religion from what l can tell.
Also, False Dichotomy: Science does not contradict Religion - at least not in the case of Islam. Feel free to show me otherwise. There’s one example, a solitary hadith about the sun making a journey to God’s throne. It was never in the Qur’an though, and of the circa 200,000 ahadith in general circulation today, that’s the only one l cannot accept at face value (and recall, l actually brought it up in a convo, l’m not hiding that).
I have studied neuroscience and my focus was on psychedelics and psychosis, so l have perhaps looked into consciousness more than most people here.
At the end of it all, l’d say consciousness is a mystery, a divine mystery. In fact according to one Shi’ah hadith (l’m Sunni), there is nothing more beloved to God than the human intellect. I feel this is true. It’s a mystery and even God marvels at it.
Reductio ad absurdam. For one thing, the modern Scientific Method was invented by a mediaeval Muslim polymath, Ibn Haytham of Basra in modern day Iraq.
The first university was the Muslim one in Madrid or the Muslim one in Kairouwan in Tunisia by the way. Prior to which there were only academies. Peace.
The word, “materialism”, itself, refers to the belief that all things are made up of matter. “Materialism” is therefore not a thing that could think or do. Just like “spiritualism”, “buddism”, or “judiasm” are not things that could think or do.
A so-called “materialist” is just a human being with the belief that all things are made up of matter. As far as we know only animals, like human beings, can think and do things.
There is irrefutable proof that not all things are made up of matter. So, a so-called “materialist” could not even exist in the first place.
You are trying to find an “opponent” to just have a fight with, of which none exists. There are human beings who might call themselves “honest or true materialists”, but it is an impossibility for such a thing to exist. However, as far as i am aware there is absolutely nothing that proves nor disproves that thought and thinking, themselves, are made up of matter or not. So, the fact is -
That whether thought and thinking is made up of matter or not is STILL UNKNOWN.
Debates need not justify themselves nor for that matter, attract blame. That is thought termination. If thought termination is your thing, then why are you here. Please, don’t answer. Please.
Oh and l don’t even understand half of what you’re writing.
Saying, “materialism” does try to find …, is like saying, “science” tries to find …., or like saying, “religion” tries to find …. None of them try to find absolutely anything. This is because of what they just are.
There is no such thing as “materialists”.
Just like there are no such things as, “muslims”, “americans”, “doctors”, nor “whites”. So, from the very outset what you two believe and/or presume is true here is stopping and preventing both of you from being able to look at and see what the actual Truth is, exaclty.