Thread: Atheists, are you materialists?

What about energy?

I think i agree with the theory.

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

What about energy?

Can it be explained as a manifestation or result of matter? If you believe the two are interchangeable, I would think that counts as a yes, but it's your call.

If you believe energy is more fundamental than matter or could accept a statement substituting "energy" for "matter" in the above definition but don't accept the statement as it stands, I would think that's a no, but again it's your call.

Yes, substituting "Matter" with "Energy" would make more sense to me...

Has anyone observed anything that wasn't made of matter or energy?

Matter is made of energy.

However there is definitely an extra layer that materialism does not predict, and that layer is consciousness.

(Said Xei in another thread)

I agree that as it is we couldn't predict consciousness, but that's fault of our understanding oh physics/the world rather than materialism itself. Eventually we'll discover and understand the source of consciousness, and seeing as it can and does affect our world every day, it's reasonable to think it can be backed by physics (or maybe consciousness itself is a fundamental part of physics).

Either way, materialism would stand.

Isn't conciousness simply a complex way to control stimuli response?

Surely if materialism couldn't predict conciousness it couldn't predict what is today's standard for life?

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

Isn't conciousness simply a complex way to control stimuli response?

Surely if materialism couldn't predict conciousness it couldn't predict what is today's standard for life?

The problem comes if you consider consciousness non-deterministic.

And deterministic is?

Action-reaction, basically the entire universe (excepting consciousness).

Everything is deterministic so it doesn't make sense at all for a non-deterministic behaviour to arise.

But conciousness IS action-reaction

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

But conciousness IS action-reaction

If you believe there's no free will, then yes.

Well there isn't.

Who voted "no" in the poll?

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

Well there isn't.

It's possible.

First define "Fee Will".

Webster to the rescue:

Main Entry: free will
: voluntary, spontaneous

Main Entry: voluntary
: proceeding from the will or from one's own choice or consent

Guys, there's a dumpster full of determinism/free will threads out back

Meh.

You could say that in almost every thread of RS.

Then free will does exist.

This, however, doesn't mean that choices aren't based on simple, but complex action/reaction. Why? Because humans can figure things out into the future a certain extent. This gives us the falsed ability of "choice".

So are you saying it exists or it doesn't?

No matter how complex a system of actions and reactions is, it will still be bound by the same deterministic laws that rule a simple system and therefore "can't" originate consciousness.

Wow, I'm pretty out of the loop. I've always heard that materialism is the belief that material possessions bring happiness, or something to that effect. It was a subject a Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby.

My answer is yes, though I can't exclude say, a 4th dimension where matter acts different than in the 3rd dimension.

edit: By the way, free will is an illusion, unless we can control quantum mechanics (if they're real).