Wonderful article. It’s a shame people don’t realize that there is NO empirical discovery that in itself necessarily has ANY effect on the underlying philosophy of science.
No observation about the empirical (observable by the senses) relationship of mind and brain has ANY effect on supporting materialism.
AND - to the surprise of most people - it’s perfectly possible to construct a purely materialistic theory to support all parapsychological phenomena, including precognition, telepathy and even psychokinesis (mind over matter). If you are committed to a purely materialistic view, there’s no inherent reason why your ability to reconstruct that bridge in Baltimore by means of your mind alone should necessarily violate materialist views. Dean Radin, in fact, who is one of the world’s leading parapsychologists, worked on developing a materialist explanation for psi phenomena for some years before turning to non materialist philosophy.
Note please, I’m not saying it’s possible to construct a truly reasonable materialistic philosophy, since the idea of pure matter or pure physical stuff is ULTIMATELY a completely incoherent one. It is, as physicist Wolfgang Pauli liked to say, so utterly confused an idea that it is “not even wrong.”
But it’s possible, at least, to construct a fairly complex materialistic philosophy that takes into account all phenomena, even if ultimately it’s absurd.
I’ve found this is very hard to get across in writing as opposed to talking in real time, but if you’re interested in seeing quite clearly why materialism is so absurd, try this:
Try to construct a scientific experiment that would provide evidence for the existence of pure physical stuff - that is, in the complete absence of any kind of consciousness.
If you read the previous sentence carefully enough, you’ll see why this is impossible without even having to think through the details of the experiment.
As far as I know, his experiment on the tower of Pisa is also a myth.
Wonderful article. It’s a shame people don’t realize that there is NO empirical discovery that in itself necessarily has ANY effect on the underlying philosophy of science.
No observation about the empirical (observable by the senses) relationship of mind and brain has ANY effect on supporting materialism.
AND - to the surprise of most people - it’s perfectly possible to construct a purely materialistic theory to support all parapsychological phenomena, including precognition, telepathy and even psychokinesis (mind over matter). If you are committed to a purely materialistic view, there’s no inherent reason why your ability to reconstruct that bridge in Baltimore by means of your mind alone should necessarily violate materialist views. Dean Radin, in fact, who is one of the world’s leading parapsychologists, worked on developing a materialist explanation for psi phenomena for some years before turning to non materialist philosophy.
Note please, I’m not saying it’s possible to construct a truly reasonable materialistic philosophy, since the idea of pure matter or pure physical stuff is ULTIMATELY a completely incoherent one. It is, as physicist Wolfgang Pauli liked to say, so utterly confused an idea that it is “not even wrong.”
But it’s possible, at least, to construct a fairly complex materialistic philosophy that takes into account all phenomena, even if ultimately it’s absurd.
I’ve found this is very hard to get across in writing as opposed to talking in real time, but if you’re interested in seeing quite clearly why materialism is so absurd, try this:
Try to construct a scientific experiment that would provide evidence for the existence of pure physical stuff - that is, in the complete absence of any kind of consciousness.
If you read the previous sentence carefully enough, you’ll see why this is impossible without even having to think through the details of the experiment.