The existence of souls

[Donnadogsoth]

5 minutes ago, Goldenages said:

 

Exactly    

We do not need a mind to make random decisions. For random decisions it´s easier to roll the dice, or do literally just anything,  and evolution would never select a conscious mind to produce such behaviour.

We do not need a mind to act deterministic. Our reflexes do this already.  Evolution would never select minds if deterministic behaviour is at least equal to mindful behaviour.

 

Our minds are right in between, weaving between randomness and clockwork.

 

regards

Andi

 

 

Then you're denying metaphysical naturalism.  Randomness and clockwork are the options for causation in a naturalistic universe.  Free choice can only come about if there is a substance that is not beholden to metaphysically naturalistic processes.  A naturalistic universe cannot "select minds" because such (metaphysically idealist) minds represent a different substance, one which is not "on tap" for the naturalist universe but transcends it.  You can't have your cake and eat it, too.

[Eudaimonic]

18 hours ago, Donnadogsoth said:

We have four bones of contention:

1.What is mind.
2.What is matter.
3.What is knowledge.
4.What sort of universe must exist to allow free will.

My positions are four.  Hopefully this will clarify matters and free the discussion from entanglements.

1.A mind is a monad, an indivisible unity possessing perception and desire. Everything a monad perceives is a part of its own substance, including its experience of the entire material world. It does not require anything else to exist, save its Creator, in order for it to (a) exist, (b) perceive, (c) desire, and (d) act on its perceptions and desires. Aside from the Creator, no other monad need exist for this to happen. Nothing exists except for monads and their qualities.
2.Matter does not exist except as the internal qualities of a monad. There is no “outside world” for matter to exist in, only an invisible sea of non-local, non-extended monads.
3.Knowledge, at the highest level, is the working out of an ontological paradox through the discovery of a principle or “thought object” existing in the mind from that mind's creation.
4.Free will is a quality of mind (monad) and requires no other monads (save the Creator) in order to function.

Thank you for clarifying you position, it makes the whole discussion smoother for me and I appreciate that.

I'll state my own post on each contention and then state my thoughts on each of yours.

1.) Mind denotes the human capacity to be self-aware i.e aware of it's own processing and it's own preceptually and sensual awareness. If you could imagine it, the brain represents human function, sensual and preceptual awareness (input/output processes) and then there is a "flashlight" which shines over specific parts of the brain, becoming aware of that part if the brain. It does this in fairly rapid succession, for instance, when you talk, each word you're communicating is the "light" of awareness shining on a different part of you brain. Mind is ultimately a conceptual tag which relates to physical process in the interaction between the prefrontal cortex and the rest of the brain (which we are not entirely aware of) but is not something individual or separate from the brain. The Emotional Brain by Joseph LeDoux talks about this a great deal and is a good read I to the phenomena if you have the time to browse it.

1b.) This is an interesting theory but I would prefer a bit more empericalproof or logical requirement as it is essentially a speculative metaphysical theory, which are hard to show due to the fact that we aren't objective to existence. How can I know that everything is a monad? As well, if monads = material reality are you as well saying that material reality is aware of itself i.e everything is aware? If monads are both physical and aware of themselves, my prior argument would still have to stand. It would first have to have Existence and then become aware of itself as the monads awareness could only come about as a result of it's initial Existence. Therefore Existence has primacy. If you move the argument to the creator, the same criticism stands. Awareness can't come before Existence or simiotantious to it because it requires existence to arise (i.e the reason why God is a self-contradictory concept)

2.) Matter (and it's unstored equivalent energy) is the physical i.e. the real. Existence = Matter/Energy. There's nothing else which you can point to emperically as the essence of everything which is. If it's not composed of matter or energy it doesn't exist. Why this is, I couldn't tell you, but it's the only thing we have emperical validation for and it seems pretty universal.

2b.) It seems to me that you're defining matter as a monad, but as there's nothing to point to to say "this is an aspect of a monad which is neither matter nor energy" that either there is no emperical basis for a monad or monads = matter in which case we can just call it matter.

3.) Knowledge represents awareness of what it real which has been reached through emperical validation and logical consistency, both of which are derived from metaphysical axioms i.e what cannot be metaphysically refuted.

3b.) How or why would a mind create ontological paradoxes for itself to figure out and why is this process higher than say, emperical sense data or logical derivitaion of principles based on that sense data. As well, if reality is simply an aspect of a monad, what would be the reason for sense data or any pursuit of knowledge? 

4.) Free Will is an aspect of evolutionary development which represents the human minds capacity to predict possible potentialities of reality and the actions which would derive each potential within a set of universals. A reflection happens back to it's conceptual values (which are structured around several heirarchies based in the individuals psychological parts i.e internal family) if the values are not in conflict (though they almost always are) automatical action based on what is valued highest occurs, if they are in conflict choice is available to the True Self among the various values, as it must act, but no one value is valued more than any other.

4b.) This seems dulistic because there is one aspect of the monad which is material and another which is free will, how is knowledge obtained with two separate metaphysical realities to contend with and/or how is free will connected by the monad?

 

[Goldenages]

3 hours ago, Donnadogsoth said:

A naturalistic universe cannot "select minds" because such (metaphysically idealist) minds represent a different substance,...

Evolution selects individuals which behave in a certain way. This behaviour is driven by mind. So evolution selects certain minds.

 

regards

Andi

[Donnadogsoth]

2 hours ago, Goldenages said:

Evolution selects individuals which behave in a certain way. This behaviour is driven by mind. So evolution selects certain minds.

 

regards

Andi

But, why should there be any such thing as a mind?  Evolutionary pressure cannot account for mind's existence, for that presumes that minds exist, it doesn't prove they have to exist.  This is the so-called "hard problem of consciousness," which is insoluble under naturalism because naturalism cannot account for mental substance.  It is legerdemain to pretend that evolution's use of mind explains mind.  Again you must be denying metaphysical naturalism in favour of either idealism or dualism.

[luxfelix]

On ‎5‎/‎2‎/‎2017 at 10:46 PM, adamNJ said:

You damage the brain, you damages the mind.  The mind is what the brain does.

 

Can we track this on a matter of scale; for example, if you damage a neuron > you damage the brain > which damages the mind > which damages the family > which damages the community > which damages the nation > which damages humanity > which damages life?

[Goldenages]

12 hours ago, Donnadogsoth said:

But, why should there be any such thing as a mind?

I don´t know    Nobody says that mind (or eyes or legs) should exist.  All I do is to assert the fact that they do exist. The first steps for any of these qualities by random changes of genes - as we know, randomness is a quality of physical laws-, thereafter evolution kicks in and preserves and enhances all that improves survival.

Its the minds who deserves for a "should". Not the evolutionary principle.

 

regards

Andi

[Donnadogsoth]

On 5/3/2017 at 11:06 AM, Eudaimonic said:

Thank you for clarifying you position, it makes the whole discussion smoother for me and I appreciate that.

I'll state my own post on each contention and then state my thoughts on each of yours.

1.) Mind denotes the human capacity to be self-aware i.e aware of it's own processing and it's own preceptually and sensual awareness. If you could imagine it, the brain represents human function, sensual and preceptual awareness (input/output processes) and then there is a "flashlight" which shines over specific parts of the brain, becoming aware of that part if the brain. It does this in fairly rapid succession, for instance, when you talk, each word you're communicating is the "light" of awareness shining on a different part of you brain. Mind is ultimately a conceptual tag which relates to physical process in the interaction between the prefrontal cortex and the rest of the brain (which we are not entirely aware of) but is not something individual or separate from the brain. The Emotional Brain by Joseph LeDoux talks about this a great deal and is a good read I to the phenomena if you have the time to browse it.

1b.) This is an interesting theory but I would prefer a bit more empericalproof or logical requirement as it is essentially a speculative metaphysical theory, which are hard to show due to the fact that we aren't objective to existence. How can I know that everything is a monad? As well, if monads = material reality are you as well saying that material reality is aware of itself i.e everything is aware? If monads are both physical and aware of themselves, my prior argument would still have to stand. It would first have to have Existence and then become aware of itself as the monads awareness could only come about as a result of it's initial Existence. Therefore Existence has primacy. If you move the argument to the creator, the same criticism stands. Awareness can't come before Existence or simiotantious to it because it requires existence to arise (i.e the reason why God is a self-contradictory concept)

2.) Matter (and it's unstored equivalent energy) is the physical i.e. the real. Existence = Matter/Energy. There's nothing else which you can point to emperically as the essence of everything which is. If it's not composed of matter or energy it doesn't exist. Why this is, I couldn't tell you, but it's the only thing we have emperical validation for and it seems pretty universal.

2b.) It seems to me that you're defining matter as a monad, but as there's nothing to point to to say "this is an aspect of a monad which is neither matter nor energy" that either there is no emperical basis for a monad or monads = matter in which case we can just call it matter.

3.) Knowledge represents awareness of what it real which has been reached through emperical validation and logical consistency, both of which are derived from metaphysical axioms i.e what cannot be metaphysically refuted.

3b.) How or why would a mind create ontological paradoxes for itself to figure out and why is this process higher than say, emperical sense data or logical derivitaion of principles based on that sense data. As well, if reality is simply an aspect of a monad, what would be the reason for sense data or any pursuit of knowledge? 

4.) Free Will is an aspect of evolutionary development which represents the human minds capacity to predict possible potentialities of reality and the actions which would derive each potential within a set of universals. A reflection happens back to it's conceptual values (which are structured around several heirarchies based in the individuals psychological parts i.e internal family) if the values are not in conflict (though they almost always are) automatical action based on what is valued highest occurs, if they are in conflict choice is available to the True Self among the various values, as it must act, but no one value is valued more than any other.

4b.) This seems dulistic because there is one aspect of the monad which is material and another which is free will, how is knowledge obtained with two separate metaphysical realities to contend with and/or how is free will connected by the monad?

 

Very well, allow me to riposte.

1.Everything that is not purely an extension of my own mind (e.g., an optical illusion, a colour, a sound) must be a monad because (a) nothing unintelligible can exist, because (b) unintelligibilility violates the principle of sufficient reason (namely that all things must have a sufficient reason to be the way they are and not another way), and (c) “nothingness” is inconceivable and therefore unintelligible. It is like imagining my own deathly non-existence; it is unthinkable. And if my own non-existence is unthinkable, (d) everything's non-existence is unthinkable as well, meaning (e) all things must have mental processes unless, as stated, they are merely extensions or parts of my mind.

2.Our experience itself is an aspect of reality that is neither matter nor energy. Science cannot explain where consciousness comes from, calling it the “Hard Problem of Consciousness,” it can only acknowledge (and some don't!) the brute fact of consciousness's existence. So our subjective experience grants a different, empirically proven (by every glance and breath we take) aspect to reality that is not in of itself material or energetic.

That said, an objection might be: consciousness might be related to matter and energy intimately, so that matter and energy contains small elements of consciousness which, when brought together in a brain, form a fully conscious mind. This is panpsychism and is the same as what I talk about in 1, above.

3., I didn't say reality is simply an aspect of a monad, I said material reality is merely an aspect of a monad. Reality as a whole is the collection of all monads, as overseen by God.

3b.The ontological paradoxes are part of a mind's self-development and interaction with other minds. The Universe needs figuring out and mastering if humanity is to survive and develop. The essence of such self-development of the mind is in the mind's creativity, or ability to conceive of creative, non-logical hypotheses which can be tested empirically for their validity. By way of analogy, imagine you knew nothing of water but its liquid state. Boiling it produces steam, but this steam can in no way be logically deduced from one's experience of liquid water. It would require a creative, non-logical hypothesis to “bridge” that gap. Thus we get Kepler's hypothesis of the principle of universal gravitation which is not a logical extension of previous astronomical knowledge but a creative “jump” across a gap to the needed principle. This is the highest level of human knowledge because this is the basis for power, specifically power to survive as a species.

3c.Sense data is our “interface” with other monads and with our own mind.

4.Free will faces more than dualism, it faces trialism because experience is composed of concepts, emotions, and sensations. I don't see how this affects free will. The monad is not “material” in any way but rather material is an experience it is having, just as it experiences emotions and conceptions. They are not three separate metaphysical realities but one.