Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can a materialistic formula explain a non-materialistic process?
bertvan
Junior Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 29
From: Palm Springs California
Joined: 09-10-2007


Message 1 of 38 (457930)
02-26-2008 11:54 AM


Can a materialistic formula explain a non-materialistic process, and is neoDarwinism a materialistic explanation? More specifically is the following a materialistic explanation?
quote:
"all organisms have descended from common ancestors solely through an unguided, unintelligent, purposeless, material processes such as natural selection acting on random variations or mutations; . the mechanisms of natural selection, random variation and mutation, and perhaps other similarly naturalistic mechanisms, are completely sufficient to account for living systems."
One doesn’t have to be a materialist to accept the above explanation from The Meanings of Evolution by Stephen C. Meyer and Michael Newton Keas, page 137. I am a non-materialist who accepts materialistic explanations of weather. More primitive societies once attributed non-materialistic forces to weather, but having learned more details, most of us accept that weather can be explained materialistically. I may have once believed life to be a material process, but having learned more details, I have concluded that non-materialistic forces such as volition, motivation, and fallible free choice are intrinsic aspects of all living processes. The amount of choice available to some living organisms may be extremely limited, but Beuhler argues that even single cultured cells display a degree of volition, of intelligent free choice.
http://www.basic.northwestern.edu/g-buehler/summary.htm
How can a materialistic process be distinguished from a non-materialistic process? Answer: judgment. Making such a distinction is itself a non-materialistic process, a subjective, fallible, free-judgment choice. And since choices would not be free without the option of being wrong, no such conclusion will ever be universally accepted.
Edited by bertvan, : Edited to add source of quote
Edited by Admin, : Make title of Meyer paper into a link.

No webpage found at provided URL: http://30145.myauthorsite.com/

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 02-26-2008 1:40 PM bertvan has replied
 Message 5 by Wounded King, posted 02-27-2008 11:35 AM bertvan has replied
 Message 6 by Modulous, posted 02-27-2008 12:31 PM bertvan has replied
 Message 16 by bluegenes, posted 02-27-2008 3:33 PM bertvan has not replied

  
bertvan
Junior Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 29
From: Palm Springs California
Joined: 09-10-2007


Message 3 of 38 (457961)
02-26-2008 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
02-26-2008 1:40 PM


Is that satisfactory?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 02-26-2008 1:40 PM Admin has not replied

  
bertvan
Junior Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 29
From: Palm Springs California
Joined: 09-10-2007


Message 9 of 38 (458152)
02-27-2008 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Wounded King
02-27-2008 11:35 AM


Hi WK,
I would argue that is the materialists who have thrown up their hands. Motivation, volition, free will and creative intelligence are non deterministic, can’t be weighed or measured, and are only statistically predictable. Because materialists don’t know how to deal with such non-deterministic forces, they seem to have concluded such forces must be ignored. Or, if they exist, volition/free choice can play no active role in living processes.
ID, on the other hand argues that motivated intelligent choice is an intrinsic aspect of all living systems. Fortunately, there will always be a few scientists who will pursue such difficult questions regardless of efforts by the establishment to discourage them.
quote:
What reason is there to suspect that given sufficient further details these won't seem material processes just as the weather does?
Since enough details aren’t yet available to satisfy all of us, it’s an open question as to whether life is a mechanistic device. You and I apparently interpret what details are available differently. I would urge both sides to openly pursue their investigation. However at this point neither you nor I would be justified in imposing our interpretation upon society as “scientific truth”.
Edited by bertvan, : No reason given.
Edited by bertvan, : No reason given.

No webpage found at provided URL: http://30145.myauthorsite.com/

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Wounded King, posted 02-27-2008 11:35 AM Wounded King has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Blue Jay, posted 02-27-2008 5:53 PM bertvan has not replied

  
bertvan
Junior Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 29
From: Palm Springs California
Joined: 09-10-2007


Message 11 of 38 (458155)
02-27-2008 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Modulous
02-27-2008 12:31 PM


I would argue that neither computers nor zompies make independent judgments. They spit out the answer they are programmed to make.

No webpage found at provided URL: http://30145.myauthorsite.com/

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Modulous, posted 02-27-2008 12:31 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Modulous, posted 02-27-2008 2:19 PM bertvan has replied

  
bertvan
Junior Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 29
From: Palm Springs California
Joined: 09-10-2007


Message 14 of 38 (458167)
02-27-2008 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Modulous
02-27-2008 2:25 PM


Is it your argument that dualism and the concept of mind as something separate from the brain are "out of fashion" among philosophers?

No webpage found at provided URL: http://30145.myauthorsite.com/

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Modulous, posted 02-27-2008 2:25 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Modulous, posted 02-27-2008 3:41 PM bertvan has not replied

  
bertvan
Junior Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 29
From: Palm Springs California
Joined: 09-10-2007


Message 15 of 38 (458172)
02-27-2008 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Modulous
02-27-2008 2:19 PM


Modulous:
quote:
A zombie is a highly advanced robot that appears to respond exactly as if it were making independent judgements. At what point is some non-materialistic force required and why?
As you say, a zombie appears to respond as if making independent judgments. (The word “exactly” seems out of place in this sentence.) I realize children who don’t understand programming might see robots as independent judgments. I didn’t know some adults regard what robots do as “making real decisions”. The point that a non-materialistic force would be required would be when new, unforeseeable information was introduced, which the robot would be required to interpret for itself. If a programmer interprets the new information and tells the robot how to react to it, the programmer is making the decision - not the robot. (Yes, I consider the mind of a human programmer a non-materialistic force.)

No webpage found at provided URL: http://30145.myauthorsite.com/

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Modulous, posted 02-27-2008 2:19 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Modulous, posted 02-27-2008 4:17 PM bertvan has not replied

  
bertvan
Junior Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 29
From: Palm Springs California
Joined: 09-10-2007


Message 24 of 38 (458269)
02-28-2008 1:04 AM


The question I asked in this thread is whether a materialistic formula can describe reality
If . . .IF. . .
that reality is actually something more than just a mechanical process?
Obviously for those of you who are materialists, random mutation and natural selection (or some equally mechanical explanation) can be sufficient to completely explain living processes. If you believe life is nothing more than a series of chemical reactions, you are not going to look for explanations that include intelligent, purposeful organization. That is as it should be. I don’t have much real enthusiasm for debating materialism or quibbling over definitions of intelligence. I am skeptical that we will someday build a computer that displays volition. But hey, no one can prove what might happen someday. I have no desire to dissuade anyone from a materialist philosophy. However, I don’t believe materialism should be obligatory. I don’t believe one philosophy is more intellectual than the other. I don’t believe one philosophy is more scientific than the other. If life is not materialistic, a materialistic explanation is not more scientific than a non-materialistic explanation.
I don’t participate in these debates just for the fun of arguing. I participate because I care passionately about academic freedom, and I’ve seen enough to convince me of the very real intimidation and harassment directed toward anyone questioning materialism in biology. I have a non-materialistic understanding of life that satisfies me. It involves an organizing intelligence innate to all living systems. I am a religious agnostic, but if religious people choose to believe their god participates in the intelligence of living organisms, they are as entitled to their belief as I am to mine. So as long as skepticism of materialism is equated with biblical creationism, I do all I can to spread the word that one doesn’t even have to be religious to be skeptical of random mutation and natural selection. One doesn’t have to be committed to a personal god to believe in an immaterial soul capable of free will, love and all sorts of immaterial things. Theism is not the only alternative to materialism.
Edited by bertvan, : No reason given.

No webpage found at provided URL: http://30145.myauthorsite.com/

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by bluegenes, posted 02-28-2008 4:40 AM bertvan has not replied
 Message 26 by Modulous, posted 02-28-2008 8:17 AM bertvan has not replied
 Message 31 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 02-28-2008 5:00 PM bertvan 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