Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

[_ Old Earth _] Occasionalism and Empiricism

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$905.00
Goal
$1,038.00

JM

Member
From a blog:

Email: What do you think about someone (a materialist) who says that the same concept can be located at two spatiotemporal locations? This happens because the brain is like a computer which copies another computer’s program. So, when I speak, the sound waves enter your ears and your brain copies the concept that I had in my head.

VC's response: I would expect a materialist to say this  it seems to follow from their view of reality. I can directly challenge them on this point, but I can also demand justification for the logically prior premises. For example, I do not believe: (1) that a "concept" is physical, and (2) that brains "think." Say that I choose to first challenge the materialist on (2). If he uses science and empiricism on the way to prove it, then I will challenge science and empiricism. My own position on this topic of thinking and concepts is a version of occasionalism, so I am able to avoid all the problems that I present against the materialist.

If the main point of your question is about communication in the materialist scheme, then I would quickly challenge empiricism. I would admit that IF the materialist can communicate to another person, then there would be two physical copies of the same thought. But I deny that they can communicate, so they will need to prove that they can communicate via empiricism first  that is, even if we were to ignore for the moment whether materialism is true, whether thoughts are physical, and whether brains can think.

http://www.vincentcheung.com/2005/04/29 ... mpiricism/
 
What do you think about someone (a materialist) who says that the same concept can be located at two spatiotemporal locations?

I'd say that as far as we can measure such a thing, it's true. At least many, many people have reported this phenomenon.

This happens because the brain is like a computer which copies another computer’s program. So, when I speak, the sound waves enter your ears and your brain copies the concept that I had in my head.

This would be completely wrong. It is not a simple matter of "making a copy in your head."

I would expect a materialist to say this  it seems to follow from their view of reality. I can directly challenge them on this point, but I can also demand justification for the logically prior premises. For example, I do not believe: (1) that a "concept" is physical,

You are correct in this.

and (2) that brains "think."

By any means we have to test such a thing, brains think.

Say that I choose to first challenge the materialist on (2). If he uses science and empiricism on the way to prove it, then I will challenge science and empiricism.

OK, I'd like to see that argument.

If the main point of your question is about communication in the materialist scheme, then I would quickly challenge empiricism. I would admit that IF the materialist can communicate to another person, then there would be two physical copies of the same thought. But I deny that they can communicate, so they will need to prove that they can communicate via empiricism first  that is, even if we were to ignore for the moment whether materialism is true, whether thoughts are physical, and whether brains can think.

That, we can measure. And it turns out that we can indeed communicate via material processes.
 
Back
Top