Total Posts:2|Showing Posts:1-2
Jump to topic:

Is there intelligibility in a physical world?

zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 12:50:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Question for you guys. Presupposing a purely naturalistic world with no teleology, that is all that exists is physical stuff, can there be any sort of "intelligibility"?

I've heard this argument and was wondering what you guys all thought.

Pretty much... If there is no teleology in the physical world, and our minds are purely physical objects, then our minds cannot have any teleology, and we can't think "about" anything, since that presupposes physical matter being "directed at" something. Furthermore, language can't be "representing" or "directed at" some other meaning. However if this is the case, doesn't this undermine any sort of thinking process or arguments in order to prove a purely physical world in the first place?
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2013 1:24:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/20/2013 12:50:46 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
Question for you guys. Presupposing a purely naturalistic world with no teleology, that is all that exists is physical stuff, can there be any sort of "intelligibility"?

I've heard this argument and was wondering what you guys all thought.

Pretty much... If there is no teleology in the physical world, and our minds are purely physical objects, then our minds cannot have any teleology, and we can't think "about" anything, since that presupposes physical matter being "directed at" something. Furthermore, language can't be "representing" or "directed at" some other meaning. However if this is the case, doesn't this undermine any sort of thinking process or arguments in order to prove a purely physical world in the first place?

so its a paradox?
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.