1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Is there a single shred of evidence against naturalism?

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Lorgar-Aurelian, May 1, 2017.

  1. Lorgar-Aurelian

    Lorgar-Aurelian Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2017
    Messages:
    581
    Ratings:
    +340
    Is there any reason other than faith to believe in the soul, god, gods, pretty much any spiritual concept?

    I used @1137 's thing to make my own thing. It's like hijacking a thread but instead of actually hijacking it we built a very similar thread right next door.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Winner Winner x 2
  2. CogentPhilosopher

    CogentPhilosopher Philosophy Student

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2017
    Messages:
    792
    Ratings:
    +284
    Religion:
    None
    He does not understand that if he ignores that the negative stance is the default one that he must disprove every single other claim in order to have his own stand.
     
  3. 1137

    1137 | O.S. Co-founder
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    12,085
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Religion:
    Order of the Serpent
    I understand this, and solipsism is the default position.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  4. CogentPhilosopher

    CogentPhilosopher Philosophy Student

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2017
    Messages:
    792
    Ratings:
    +284
    Religion:
    None
    Yeah I know. But I can work naturally from solipsism into naturalism, would you care to follow the steps with me?
     
  5. 1137

    1137 | O.S. Co-founder
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    12,085
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Religion:
    Order of the Serpent
    I believe both "soul" and "god" are easily understood within the theory of forms, which itself seems rather sound so far as I can tell. Of course it all depends on how we are defining these words. I don't like the term "naturalism" in this sense, as it seems to imply physical = natural, which puts the cart before the horse. Physicalism, however, is inherently and hopelessly flawed. It is riddled with problems at the foundational level, from the axiomatic self to property dualism, two way causality to the fact that physicalism must make the absurd claim that we can be more certain of matter than our own existence. The fact that we cannot, in any direct, scientific, physical way access the internal experience of a single thing outside ourselves, rather clearly suggests that these things are not physical. And physicalism has not come close to finding any magical mechanism by which consciousness comes from unconscious material.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. 1137

    1137 | O.S. Co-founder
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    12,085
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Religion:
    Order of the Serpent
    Well I've asked literally dozens of times over three threads now for exactly that, so yes?
     
  7. CogentPhilosopher

    CogentPhilosopher Philosophy Student

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2017
    Messages:
    792
    Ratings:
    +284
    Religion:
    None
    First you doubt everything even your own thoughts, after all everything that you see or think could be false or deceptions.

    But in order to be deceived or have false thoughts, something that means that "you" must exist and be having thoughts. So therefore you are a thinking thing. That you can be 100% for sure of.

    Here is the problem after this, you can never know for certain that the reality you perceive is real. But if it is not real then what else is there to act on? As there is no alternative it is best to act as if it is real. Whether the reality our senses pick up is real or not can not be certain.

    Now from this point I can see no evidence to suggest that there is anything else demanding or suggesting for me to believe in it apart from what we can perceive in reality and the things that we know act on our perceivable reality.

    If you have some evidence that we should add belief other than that I would be very happy to see it.
     
  8. 1137

    1137 | O.S. Co-founder
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    12,085
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Religion:
    Order of the Serpent
    How do you make the major logical leap from "we only know we exist, and can doubt everything else," to "only the physical universe exists?"
     
  9. CogentPhilosopher

    CogentPhilosopher Philosophy Student

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2017
    Messages:
    792
    Ratings:
    +284
    Religion:
    None
    When did I do that?

    Nothing Exists--> Self Exists --> Physical Universe may or may not exist but we should act as thought it does.

    In order to believe in something other than than the universe I can observe and the forces that act on it, I would need some sort of evidence.
     
  10. 1137

    1137 | O.S. Co-founder
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    12,085
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Religion:
    Order of the Serpent
    Can you define naturalism for me?
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  11. CogentPhilosopher

    CogentPhilosopher Philosophy Student

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2017
    Messages:
    792
    Ratings:
    +284
    Religion:
    None
    The lack of belief that anything exists that cannot be described by natural laws or the belief that everything that exists can be described by natural laws.
     
  12. 1137

    1137 | O.S. Co-founder
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    12,085
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Religion:
    Order of the Serpent
    What are natural laws? If our understanding of what's natural is incomplete, and gods somehow fit into that natural law, would you still be a naturalist? Do you think everything is made of "physical" things, aka able to be studied by physical science or explained solely by physical processes?
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  13. CogentPhilosopher

    CogentPhilosopher Philosophy Student

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2017
    Messages:
    792
    Ratings:
    +284
    Religion:
    None
    Yes and yes.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Lorgar-Aurelian

    Lorgar-Aurelian Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2017
    Messages:
    581
    Ratings:
    +340
    God its so hot when you argue with him...
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  15. CogentPhilosopher

    CogentPhilosopher Philosophy Student

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2017
    Messages:
    792
    Ratings:
    +284
    Religion:
    None
    .....................

    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 5
  16. George-ananda

    George-ananda Advaita Vedanta and Spiritualist and Pantheist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    13,733
    Ratings:
    +4,768
    Religion:
    Advaita and Spiritualist and Pantheist
    Yes, and it would come from an analysis of the evidence and a consideration of the various worldviews out there explaining the evidence

    What evidence? Here's the tip of an iceberg....Evidence
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Windwalker

    Windwalker Integralist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    7,884
    Ratings:
    +3,901
    Religion:
    Love, Light, and Life
    Why do any of these negate naturalism? Belief in the soul or God, does not have to mean belief in magical explanations for the origins of the natural world. These are two different areas of inquiry.

    But as to evidence for the soul or God, sure. Go meditate. You'll have your answer, and then the question of how to talk about that, what to call that really is the only issue. Experience is evidence.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  18. 1137

    1137 | O.S. Co-founder
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    12,085
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Religion:
    Order of the Serpent
    So you are, indeed, a physicalist?
     
  19. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,244
    Ratings:
    +11,810
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    • Informative Informative x 1
  20. 1137

    1137 | O.S. Co-founder
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    12,085
    Ratings:
    +1,925
    Religion:
    Order of the Serpent
    So you ask for evidence against naturalism and get an unrefuted, basically untouched paragraph in the first hour. You ask for evidence for physicalism and three pages in there's nothing even close to support for it. Fascinating.
     
Loading...