https://www.reddit.com/r/freewill/comments/1f7z1sq/i_believe_physicalism_is/
created by diogenesthehopeful on 03/09/2024 at 12:47 UTC
3 upvotes, 7 top-level comments (showing 7)
Comment by mildmys at 03/09/2024 at 13:18 UTC
3 upvotes, 2 direct replies
Physicalism is the common assumption among scientists and laypeople.
It struggles very much with the hard problem of consciousness and so I think alternatives are better.
Comment by gimboarretino at 03/09/2024 at 15:22 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Premise: I'm adressing only the eliminativist/hard reductionst version physicalism, emergence-oriented physicalism is fine, more or less.
A) In a reductionist (eliminativist) physicalist framework, everything—including ourselves— ultimately is a quantum system (or fundamental physical constituents of reality), governed in all its configurations, behaviors, and interactions by the laws of physics.
B) we (ourselves, our brains, whatever) are also quantum systems and nothing more; thus we must (try to) describe and understand ourselves in that framework. We must also assume we are quantum systems capable of making true statements (or acquiring knowledge) about other quantum systems (e.g., "it's raining in Kansas City", or "water = H2O") or even about the totality of quantum systems (e.g., "the universe as a whole works this way and not that way" "physicalism is true" etc.).
"A true statement" (or acquired knowledge) here is nothing mystical or philosophical or mysterious or even epistemic. It simply means that a quantum system adopts a specific configuration distinct from one that makes different kind of statementes.
To prove physicalism right, you must answer to 2 questions.
First question: are we able to describe the properties and features of such "true-fact finding" configurations, and explain how distinguish them from not-true configurations, within the reductionist quantum mechanical framework we're operating in?
Second questions. Since nothing happens by chance, and every event is caused by a chain of prior physical events under the sway of physical laws, a system adopting a true /fact-finding configuration is itself a physical event and cannot be random: it must be justified by previous physical phenomena and natural laws. Can we identify and describe this casual process? How does it develop? How does it lead to true configurations? Can we make predictions? Given the state of universe A in time 1, can we describe how it will evolve into state B in time 2 where it is characterized by a necessarily true (or not-true) configuration?
Comment by Delicious_Freedom_81 at 04/09/2024 at 10:38 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
N=34
Here’s hoping for the 1000‘s of responses
Comment by [deleted] at 07/09/2024 at 03:15 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
[removed]
Comment by ihavenoego at 03/09/2024 at 14:14 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
If you believe in love then we're all different. Otherwise love is just genes.
Comment by DiegoArmandoConfusao at 03/09/2024 at 14:26 UTC*
-1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
A useful fiction.
Comment by [deleted] at 03/09/2024 at 13:12 UTC
-2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
This is a fine example of why philosophy is at best merely entertaining.