Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Argument for Idealism

Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2014 11:14:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm having a hard time putting this in words, and it is a cursory thought I am having.

p1. IN a physical world information of substance is always present and changes by interactions with other eternally present information.

p2. In this world, matter or energy can be described as a wave function of possibilities with the collapse of the possibilities into reality resulting from the spontaneous emergence of new information into the system from the vacuum energy in the form of W and Z bosons, etc..

p3. The spontaneous emergence of new information into a system to make things fixed or "real" is in contradiction to p1.

c1. Materialism is false and idealism is likely.

Discussion would be nice.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2014 8:32:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/14/2014 11:14:46 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
I'm having a hard time putting this in words, and it is a cursory thought I am having.

p1. IN a physical world information of substance is always present and changes by interactions with other eternally present information.

p2. In this world, matter or energy can be described as a wave function of possibilities with the collapse of the possibilities into reality resulting from the spontaneous emergence of new information into the system from the vacuum energy in the form of W and Z bosons, etc..

p3. The spontaneous emergence of new information into a system to make things fixed or "real" is in contradiction to p1.

c1. Materialism is false and idealism is likely.

Discussion would be nice.

Doesn't even seem like a valid argument (what type of syllogism is this supposed to be?). An argument has to be valid, as in, uses a valid form of logic (modus ponens, or modus tollens for example). This just seems like a big non-sequitur.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2014 8:41:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/15/2014 8:32:44 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/14/2014 11:14:46 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
I'm having a hard time putting this in words, and it is a cursory thought I am having.

p1. IN a physical world information of substance is always present and changes by interactions with other eternally present information.

p2. In this world, matter or energy can be described as a wave function of possibilities with the collapse of the possibilities into reality resulting from the spontaneous emergence of new information into the system from the vacuum energy in the form of W and Z bosons, etc..

p3. The spontaneous emergence of new information into a system to make things fixed or "real" is in contradiction to p1.

c1. Materialism is false and idealism is likely.

Discussion would be nice.

Doesn't even seem like a valid argument (what type of syllogism is this supposed to be?). An argument has to be valid, as in, uses a valid form of logic (modus ponens, or modus tollens for example). This just seems like a big non-sequitur.

P1. If Materialism is True, Then the information present in a system can not be created nor destroyed and can only change through interactions with already present information.

P2. Information is changed by spontaneously generated information. Not Already present information.

C1. Materialism is False.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2014 8:43:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/15/2014 8:41:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:32:44 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/14/2014 11:14:46 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
I'm having a hard time putting this in words, and it is a cursory thought I am having.

p1. IN a physical world information of substance is always present and changes by interactions with other eternally present information.

p2. In this world, matter or energy can be described as a wave function of possibilities with the collapse of the possibilities into reality resulting from the spontaneous emergence of new information into the system from the vacuum energy in the form of W and Z bosons, etc..

p3. The spontaneous emergence of new information into a system to make things fixed or "real" is in contradiction to p1.

c1. Materialism is false and idealism is likely.

Discussion would be nice.

Doesn't even seem like a valid argument (what type of syllogism is this supposed to be?). An argument has to be valid, as in, uses a valid form of logic (modus ponens, or modus tollens for example). This just seems like a big non-sequitur.

P1. If Materialism is True, Then the information present in a system can not be created nor destroyed and can only change through interactions with already present information.

P2. Information is changed by spontaneously generated information. Not Already present information.

C1. Materialism is False.

There you go (this is modus ponens). However, there are 2 other issues:

1) Why believe the premises are true?

2) Materialism being false doesn't imply Idealism necessarily. Why not Dualism, or Neutral Monism?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2014 8:53:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/15/2014 8:43:28 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:41:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:32:44 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/14/2014 11:14:46 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
I'm having a hard time putting this in words, and it is a cursory thought I am having.

p1. IN a physical world information of substance is always present and changes by interactions with other eternally present information.

p2. In this world, matter or energy can be described as a wave function of possibilities with the collapse of the possibilities into reality resulting from the spontaneous emergence of new information into the system from the vacuum energy in the form of W and Z bosons, etc..

p3. The spontaneous emergence of new information into a system to make things fixed or "real" is in contradiction to p1.

c1. Materialism is false and idealism is likely.

Discussion would be nice.

Doesn't even seem like a valid argument (what type of syllogism is this supposed to be?). An argument has to be valid, as in, uses a valid form of logic (modus ponens, or modus tollens for example). This just seems like a big non-sequitur.

P1. If Materialism is True, Then the information present in a system can not be created nor destroyed and can only change through interactions with already present information.

P2. Information is changed by spontaneously generated information. Not Already present information.

C1. Materialism is False.

There you go (this is modus ponens). However, there are 2 other issues:

1) Why believe the premises are true?

2) Materialism being false doesn't imply Idealism necessarily. Why not Dualism, or Neutral Monism?

I would say the spontaneous generation of new information into a system is allowed by anything not strictly physical.

Neutral Monism is almost like trying to give mental attributes to physical substances. And I think would be very hard to distinguish from Idealism from our perspective.

I'm suggesting information comes form quantum vacuum to establish and collapse wave functions.

If things were just physical, wouldn't there be some kind of "transcendental" mechanism to cause that new information to emerge, to facilitate transmission of forces and such?
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2014 8:57:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/15/2014 8:41:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:32:44 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/14/2014 11:14:46 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
I'm having a hard time putting this in words, and it is a cursory thought I am having.

p1. IN a physical world information of substance is always present and changes by interactions with other eternally present information.

p2. In this world, matter or energy can be described as a wave function of possibilities with the collapse of the possibilities into reality resulting from the spontaneous emergence of new information into the system from the vacuum energy in the form of W and Z bosons, etc..

p3. The spontaneous emergence of new information into a system to make things fixed or "real" is in contradiction to p1.

c1. Materialism is false and idealism is likely.

Discussion would be nice.

Doesn't even seem like a valid argument (what type of syllogism is this supposed to be?). An argument has to be valid, as in, uses a valid form of logic (modus ponens, or modus tollens for example). This just seems like a big non-sequitur.

P1. If Materialism is True, Then the information present in a system can not be created nor destroyed and can only change through interactions with already present information.

P2. Information is changed by spontaneously generated information. Not Already present information.

C1. Materialism is False.

I see no reason to accept P1, since this is something only a small subset of takes on materialism would demand. It also assumes the PSR always holds, which I find controversial, Hawking's theory that black holes destroyed information didn't do much to attack materialism, and I don't see your bald assertion would either.

Moreover P2 also seems controversial, there never appears to be a consensus on whether or not examples proposed truly are such examples of violation of information conservation, or not.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2014 9:04:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/15/2014 8:57:57 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:41:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:32:44 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/14/2014 11:14:46 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
I'm having a hard time putting this in words, and it is a cursory thought I am having.

p1. IN a physical world information of substance is always present and changes by interactions with other eternally present information.

p2. In this world, matter or energy can be described as a wave function of possibilities with the collapse of the possibilities into reality resulting from the spontaneous emergence of new information into the system from the vacuum energy in the form of W and Z bosons, etc..

p3. The spontaneous emergence of new information into a system to make things fixed or "real" is in contradiction to p1.

c1. Materialism is false and idealism is likely.

Discussion would be nice.

Doesn't even seem like a valid argument (what type of syllogism is this supposed to be?). An argument has to be valid, as in, uses a valid form of logic (modus ponens, or modus tollens for example). This just seems like a big non-sequitur.

P1. If Materialism is True, Then the information present in a system can not be created nor destroyed and can only change through interactions with already present information.

P2. Information is changed by spontaneously generated information. Not Already present information.

C1. Materialism is False.

I see no reason to accept P1, since this is something only a small subset of takes on materialism would demand.

What's a great description of materialism ontology?

Would yours include that physical things can be in 2 different places at the same time, Without adding new energy to the system?

It also assumes the PSR always holds, which I find controversial, Hawking's theory that black holes destroyed information didn't do much to attack materialism, and I don't see your bald assertion would either.

Moreover P2 also seems controversial, there never appears to be a consensus on whether or not examples proposed truly are such examples of violation of information conservation, or not.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2014 9:08:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/15/2014 9:04:28 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:57:57 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:41:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:32:44 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/14/2014 11:14:46 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
I'm having a hard time putting this in words, and it is a cursory thought I am having.

p1. IN a physical world information of substance is always present and changes by interactions with other eternally present information.

p2. In this world, matter or energy can be described as a wave function of possibilities with the collapse of the possibilities into reality resulting from the spontaneous emergence of new information into the system from the vacuum energy in the form of W and Z bosons, etc..

p3. The spontaneous emergence of new information into a system to make things fixed or "real" is in contradiction to p1.

c1. Materialism is false and idealism is likely.

Discussion would be nice.

Doesn't even seem like a valid argument (what type of syllogism is this supposed to be?). An argument has to be valid, as in, uses a valid form of logic (modus ponens, or modus tollens for example). This just seems like a big non-sequitur.

P1. If Materialism is True, Then the information present in a system can not be created nor destroyed and can only change through interactions with already present information.

P2. Information is changed by spontaneously generated information. Not Already present information.

C1. Materialism is False.

I see no reason to accept P1, since this is something only a small subset of takes on materialism would demand.

What's a great description of materialism ontology?

'All that exists is material'.

That's it. Materialism is a very large superset of sub-ontologies, just like dualism and idealism is.

Would yours include that physical things can be in 2 different places at the same time, Without adding new energy to the system?

I don't have an opinion on this either way.

It also assumes the PSR always holds, which I find controversial, Hawking's theory that black holes destroyed information didn't do much to attack materialism, and I don't see your bald assertion would either.

Moreover P2 also seems controversial, there never appears to be a consensus on whether or not examples proposed truly are such examples of violation of information conservation, or not.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2014 9:27:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/15/2014 9:08:32 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 7/15/2014 9:04:28 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:57:57 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:41:20 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/15/2014 8:32:44 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/14/2014 11:14:46 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
I'm having a hard time putting this in words, and it is a cursory thought I am having.

p1. IN a physical world information of substance is always present and changes by interactions with other eternally present information.

p2. In this world, matter or energy can be described as a wave function of possibilities with the collapse of the possibilities into reality resulting from the spontaneous emergence of new information into the system from the vacuum energy in the form of W and Z bosons, etc..

p3. The spontaneous emergence of new information into a system to make things fixed or "real" is in contradiction to p1.

c1. Materialism is false and idealism is likely.

Discussion would be nice.

Doesn't even seem like a valid argument (what type of syllogism is this supposed to be?). An argument has to be valid, as in, uses a valid form of logic (modus ponens, or modus tollens for example). This just seems like a big non-sequitur.

P1. If Materialism is True, Then the information present in a system can not be created nor destroyed and can only change through interactions with already present information.

P2. Information is changed by spontaneously generated information. Not Already present information.

C1. Materialism is False.

I see no reason to accept P1, since this is something only a small subset of takes on materialism would demand.

What's a great description of materialism ontology?

'All that exists is material'.

That's it. Materialism is a very large superset of sub-ontologies, just like dualism and idealism is.

Would yours include that physical things can be in 2 different places at the same time, Without adding new energy to the system?

I don't have an opinion on this either way.

It also assumes the PSR always holds, which I find controversial, Hawking's theory that black holes destroyed information didn't do much to attack materialism, and I don't see your bald assertion would either.

Moreover P2 also seems controversial, there never appears to be a consensus on whether or not examples proposed truly are such examples of violation of information conservation, or not.

Well that was a lot of help. I think I know what horn of Hempel's dilemma you have grabbed onto.