What is materialism?

[Parsimony]

So what would not fit into 'materialism' with you?

In accordance with the definition he gave in the OP: "a philosophical approach that assumes there will be a natural explanation", something that does not have a natural explanation should be an example of something that would not fit.

 

[George-ananda]

In accordance with the definition he gave in the OP: "a philosophical approach that assumes there will be a natural explanation", something that does not have a natural explanation should be an example of something that would not fit.

OK, what if there is a 'natural' explanation but the explanation involves elements beyond the physical plane? I would say, if it happens, it has to be part of the natural.

 

[Parsimony]

OK, what if there is a 'natural' explanation but the explanation involves elements beyond the physical plane? I would say, if it happens, it has to be part of the natural.

If "beyond the physical plane" refers to higher dimensions or a parallel universe, that might be sufficient to classify it as materialistic. However, what exactly it is that separates the spiritual from the material isn't really clear. What if, for example, ghosts and spirits exist but are composed of a form of intangible matter that has its own laws that govern how it behaves (kind of like dark matter or mirror matter). Would that put spirits under the umbrella of materialism? What does it even mean to be immaterial? Is light immaterial? Or neutrinos?

 

[Laika]

OK, what if there is a 'natural' explanation but the explanation involves elements beyond the physical plane? I would say, if it happens, it has to be part of the natural.

In the Marxist case, something beyond the 'physical plane' would probably be dismissed. This is what happened with a large number of scientific theories in physics. The problem was is that if matter is primary, and consciousness secondary, the universe must have always existed, and time and space must exist objectively of whether they are being percieved. there was therefore opposition to various aspects of the Theory of Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, the Big Bang etc, because they challanged the notion that matter was primary. So materialism changes the definition of what is "natural" and limits the explanations that are possible. But again, this is the marxist case which tends towards the excentric as it is a 'world view'.

 

[George-ananda]

If "beyond the physical plane" refers to higher dimensions or a parallel universe, that might be sufficient to classify it as materialistic.

I think the definition of 'materialism' is meant to only refer to the matter/energy of the physical plane.

However, what exactly it is that separates the spiritual from the material isn't really clear. What if, for example, ghosts and spirits exist but are composed of a form of intangible matter that has its own laws that govern how it behaves (kind of like dark matter or mirror matter). Would that put spirits under the umbrella of materialism? What does it even mean to be immaterial? Is light immaterial? Or neutrinos?

Ghosts of intangible matter as you put it would be outside of 'materialism' as I believe the term is intended to be used. If you include heavenly planes where astral beings reside under 'materialism' then the term says almost nothing. Materialists do not believe in ghosts or heavenly planes as I understand the term.

 

[Bunyip]

That's the "lens" called naturalism.

Materialism is the lens that sees everything reducible to matter.

So you say. Do you have a definition?

 

[Bunyip]

Here is Wikipedia's answer:

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are identical with material interactions.

Materialism is closely related to physicalism, the view that all that exists is ultimately physical. Philosophical physicalism has evolved from materialism with the discoveries of the physical sciences to incorporate more sophisticated notions of physicality than mere ordinary matter, such as: spacetime, physical energies and forces, dark matter, and so on. Thus the term "physicalism" is preferred over "materialism" by some, while others use the terms as if they are synonymous.

Did you notice how that definition does not even mention that materialism denies the existence of the concept of God, or evidence for the paranormal and so on?
So why is the definition you just posted so very, very different from the one you usually apply?

Why did you post the wiki definition, rather than the one you apply in these threads?

 

[Bunyip]

I think the word for that is naturalism.

The thesis that matter is the only substance. It's a position in an old, odd philosophical debate.

Isn't 'substance' just another word for 'matter'?

 

[Bunyip]

No, I didn't say people "mistake" materialism for physicalism, I said the way in which people use the word "materialism" is as a synonym for "physicalism" with respect to how it is defined in philosophical dialogues (and even in philosophical dialogues, physicalism and materialism are used interchangeably in this way). The colloquial meaning for materialism is the same as how physicalism/materialism is understood in philosophy: that nothing exists except matter, or that everything reduces to it. But it's worth noting that "materialism" is a term also used to describe people who are not philosophical materialists/physicalists, but people who value material possessions over other things or have a consumerist mindset. That clearly isn't what we are talking about here, though.

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[George-ananda]

Did you notice how that definition does not even mention that materialism denies the existence of the concept of God,

Nobody can deny 'the concept of God' exists. But materialists do not believe in God's existence (beyond the concept).

or evidence for the paranormal and so on?

Materialists believe all so-called paranormal phenomena claims have a materialistic explanation even if not immediately known.

So why is the definition you just posted so very, very different from the one you usually apply?

Why did you post the wiki definition, rather than the one you apply in these threads?

I use the Wiki definition in the threads myself. I honestly don't feel you understand me or the definition.

 

[Bunyip]

Nobody can deny 'the concept of God' exists. But materialists do not believe in God's existence (beyond the concept).


Materialists believe all so-called paranormal phenomena claims have a materialistic explanation even if not immediately known.


I use the Wiki definition in the threads myself. I honestly don't feel you understand me or the definition.

You said before that materialists deny the concept of God. A claim I tried to address - hence starting this thread. Now you contradict yourself.
I should have expected nothing more, lets leave it there.

 

[George-ananda]

You said before that materialists deny the concept of God. A claim I tried to address - hence starting this thread. Now you contradict yourself.
I should have expected nothing more, lets leave it there.

Who in their right mind would ever think 'the concept of God' does not exist??

 

[Bunyip]

Who in their right mind would ever think 'the concept of God' does not exist??

As i said, lets leave it. You are being dishonest, there is nothing I can do about that.

You were emphatic in making the point that materialism denies the concept of God in an earlier thread, you deny it - and so there is no point in further exploring it.

 

[Bunyip]

Who in their right mind would ever think 'the concept of God' does not exist??

Why did you attribute that position to materialists then?

Check your posts.
There was #157 in the thread 'The death of atheism soundwaves look like Hebrew letters'
And of course; #155.

 

[Yerda]

Isn't 'substance' just another word for 'matter'?

Substance is a messy and confusing idea found in metaphysics.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaphysics/#Sub

Descartes is probably the most famous proponent of substance dualism where mind and matter are considered distinct.

 

[Bunyip]

Substance is a messy and confusing idea found in metaphysics.

Indeed. So is 'matter'.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaphysics/#Sub

Descartes is probably the most famous proponent of substance dualism where mind and matter are considered distinct.

 

[Yerda]

Indeed. So is 'matter'.

I agree. They aren't the same messy and confusing ideas though.

 

[Bunyip]

I agree. They aren't the same messy and confusing ideas though.

Oh ok. So what sort of substance is there that is not material?

 

[Yerda]

Oh ok. So what sort of substance is there that is not material?

Mind - according to Descartes, Berkely, Hegel et al. Some other non-mind non-material substance (that gives rise to both) according to Russell and Spinoza. Plato's forms are non-material but apparently substantial.

 

[Bunyip]

Mind - according to Descartes, Berkely, Hegel et al. Some other non-mind non-material substance (that gives rise to both) according to Russell and Spinoza. Plato's forms are non-material.

How is mind substance? What sort of substance is it?