I actually had a quite extended argument with Rachel's brother Jacob (who is a grad student or postdoc in Philosophy), although I'm sure it annoyed everyone at the dinner table we were talking round
( ... )
Interesting that there's no idealism option. I'd be an idealist before a materialist. I'd generally go with (what I like to think of as) a Kantian approach and throw myself in with Transcendental Idealism
( ... )
So, basically, Materialism as a model of the universe is brilliant, especially for scientific purposes. I'd consider it very accurate (there's a reason why we evolved to view the world that way).
I don't think it's true as a metaphysical position though.
The only things we arguably experience in itself, rather than via representation, is thought, feeling and direct sensory input (before it's organised into a framework). Those building blocks aren't material at all and the rest is mentally constructed.
I'd say materialist but then I work in science with a bunch of scientists day in and day out. I expect I've adopted a more science based approach to the world as a result.
Comments 10
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I don't think it's true as a metaphysical position though.
The only things we arguably experience in itself, rather than via representation, is thought, feeling and direct sensory input (before it's organised into a framework). Those building blocks aren't material at all and the rest is mentally constructed.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Leave a comment