Problems with Cause and Effect

I'm new here, but I've been reading through the posts to see what some of the arguments are. There are alot of materials on abiogenesis and how it can't happen. However, the arguments are based on the concept of materialistic philosophy and strict determinism.What I want to propose is this: The world is not fully materialistic. The world is made up of a meaningful environment. What this means is that meaning is not in the head of a human observer, but rather meaning arises out of conditions. If meaning comes from conditions and situations, then a materialistic world is too limited. For example, the meaning that a certain plant is poisonous for an organism, is part of its ecological niche, not something that the organism judges. The information is picked up by the organism.What this has to do with cause and effect is that external factors don't impose themself on another object. Two events interact with one another and the two events are mutual that a, what I call, system jump occurs. What this means is that the new event can't be reduced to the preceding events, but can't be said to cause the new event.Modern physics, as described by Shaw and Turvey in 1999, is not about finding what brings something into existence, but rather how current existents deny (censures) new possible existents. So in arguing that life cannot come about from chemicals is correct. However, given new ideas in physics, science does not claim that it can. What they are trying to figure out is how the given conditions are suitable for life to come about, without giving claim that the chemicals magically created life.This can also explain the big bang dispute. How did the big bang occur if there was nothing before it? This is the wrong question to ask since it assumes a pure materialistic world. But if we consider a meaningful world, which, again, includes conditions, then there is no problem.Here is a paper that describes the how meaning is part of the world using quantum theory. This will probably enter into our discussion since chaotic theory enters into what cause and effect is. Also, the quantum theory is starting to move into the macro world which alot of problems can be solved.Just go to faculty; then Dr. Ravi V. Gomatam; then scroll down to Quatum Theory and the Observation Theory (I'm not sure why you can't have a direct link to the paper). http://www.bvinst.edu/staff/index.htmlBrianThis message has been edited by phenomenologist, 08-12-2004 07:30 PMThis message has been edited by phenomenologist, 08-12-2004 07:34 PM

I don't feel this will produce productive debate on the topics of concern to this forum.If another admin likes it or if other members want it moved then fine. But I'll leave it here until there is more input.

I thought since it dealt with abiogenesis that it would be talked about. Can I ask what your concerns of the topic is? Should I change it in any way?Brian

I'm sorry but re reading it and browsing your site didn't enlighten me that much. I'm simply not qualified to deal with it.
I'll leave it to someone else who can understand it.Meanwhile others can request it be moved if they understand it better.

Hi, Phenomenologist, are you still around? If so, let me know and I'll work with you toward releasing your topic.--Percy

Yes, I'm still here. I just haven't been around in awhile. I'm not sure how much time I can spend discussing the topic, but I'm willing to try to get it posted. Right now I'm trying to work out an abstract for a paper I wrote last semester (my professor recommended my paper to another faculty member and they want me to submit it to a philosophy conference, but I'm an undergrad and the conference is for faculty and grad students so I'm a wreck right now trying to get it in the best possible form). But I'll pop in every onece in awhile to see what is being posted.Brian

Take your time, no hurry.When you get a chance, can you post a new version of your first message that begins, "The world is not fully materialistic." Then go on to make your case, but be sure to define your terms.For example, conditions appears to have an important meaning for you, but it isn't very clear. It appears to be referring to the current state. Either use common, everyday terminology, or define your terms. For example, instead of saying "Meaning arises out of conditions," which is fairly obscure, you might instead explain how meaning is associated with the current state.Some of your explanations seem incomplete. I have a feeling that your phrase "meaning is not in the head of a human observer" is somehow related to the later comment that the poisonous plant is "not something that the organism judges," but it isn't clear how, and it isn't clear that this really relates to your argument about the materialistic being too limited.I suggest stating and defining your premise in clear language, then citing one or two very clear examples so that people know what you're talking about.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.