Dualism hasn't met the burden of proof.

[G.T.]

Peace bro. Have a good day at work. 2 outta 5 respondants here interested me so far - so this thread's not a waste of my time. And yupp, this another one of those shamelesssss bumps that go ratt tatt tatt tatt in these dangerous slums, ohhhhhhh I like my kevlarrrrrrrr...but the shots still burn I like my kevlarrrrr...the hypocrisy burns

Honest men can have honest differences of opinion without being afraid to express their differences or act like jerks towards each other.

Growth filled communities should explore all sides of an issue to arrive at objective truth.

I agree, that's been the case here so far with Ringel and Old Lady (well, honest women as well).

No one is all good or all bad. You should stop treating them as they are.

I'm not interested in you or your thoughts, that's basically it.

 

[ding]

Peace bro. Have a good day at work. 2 outta 5 respondants here interested me so far - so this thread's not a waste of my time. And yupp, this another one of those shamelesssss bumps that go ratt tatt tatt tatt in these dangerous slums, ohhhhhhh I like my kevlarrrrrrrr...but the shots still burn I like my kevlarrrrr...the hypocrisy burns

Honest men can have honest differences of opinion without being afraid to express their differences or act like jerks towards each other.

Growth filled communities should explore all sides of an issue to arrive at objective truth.

I agree, that's been the case here so far with Ringel and Old Lady (well, honest women as well).

No one is all good or all bad. You should stop treating them as they are.

I'm not interested in you or your thoughts, that's basically it.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[G.T.]

Again, what does that matter in the realm of the metaphysical?
Oh and aren't you making assumptions based of the physical observances that may have nothing to do with the actuality? Observable phenomenon only tells us what we see but doesn't always explain the why and how. Just because we are unaware of something that is not "observable" doesn't automatically negate the possibility of it's existence or even throw doubt on said existence.

It matters in the discussion of philosophy, and what it's reasonable to assume as truth.

If dualism doesn't meet the burden of proof, it's unreasonable to assume as true but is a mere matter of faith. That's just coherent rationalism. That's why positive claims are those that harbor the burden of proof, agnosticism of a topic is the starting disposition. You're adding on more assumptions, getting farther away from dualism in your above post by implying that it's not falsifiable, which would be another argument against considering it the truth.

Claims that are not falsifiable are not provable, and can be dismissed on account of that.

I'm claiming dualism lies within the realm of the metaphysical which means it can't be substantiated or un-substantiated so I've added no assumptions. I'm simply stating that the belief in the existence of dualism and the belief that dualism doesn't exist are simply that, beliefs that no physical science or philosophical logic can prove, dis-prove, take away from or add too.
Now if ever definitive proof/evidence that can be directly linked then the subject moves from the metaphysical into the realm of the physical, current neuroscience observations have drawn a possible correlation but nothing more.
For all intent an purposes the subject is a moot point.

The subject is "can dualism be rationally justified."

It's not "dualism is a false belief."

So far, you seem to be saying no - it cannot be rationally justified.

We agree. Agnosticism on dualism seems the most rational approach.

Neuroscience does proffer evidence in one direction, and that's because theistic dualism posits the mind as the body-less spirit that moves on when your physical body dies. Anything that correlates our thoughts, intentions and beliefs with the material world does run counter to that because it adds physical states as an essential property of the mind which counters the theistic dualists' view.

Gut bacteria alter intentional states(beliefs). Hormones alter intentional states(beliefs). This is evidence against theistic dualism, short of re-defining it which is special pleading.

Well, however logical it is, monism is repellant, intuitively. Who wants to ascribe Beethoven's 9th or Leaves of Grass to GUT BACTERIA?
Jesus, G.T.
Spirits are used to explain what we don't understand. The more we understand, the less we need the spirit explanation. But for individual humans with talents and ideas and accomplishments, even if only the best belcher among your friends, it is still repugnant to be reduced to nothing but a bunch of chemicals flowing over an ugly two pound mass of tissue and GUT BACTERIA.

Just an observation.

Ghosts, angels, werewolves, vampires, aliens are all manifestations of programs doing what they're not supposed to be doing........

Simulation theory intrigues me. Keeps us in the same place, though...i.e. the "programmer" came from where?, is there a programmer at all?, or is existence, in effect, a brute fact and its "code" is merely descriptive and not prescriptive. Simulation theory is wild but its voracity merely kicks our can down the alley way : /

 

[Damaged Eagle]

No one is all good or all bad. You should stop treating them as they are.

I'm not interested in you or your thoughts, that's basically it.

*****ROFLMAO*****

 

[ding]

Simulation theory Is an excellent analog for our existence. There was a creator, there was a beginning of the creation and we were given the attributes of the creator.

The argument that simulation theory does not address the first cause conundrum is valid.

We know from logic that the only solution to what came before that is something which had no beginning. Which means it was eternal. We know from logic the only thing that can be eternal is something which is unchanging.

From these attributes we know that the first cause cannot be matter and energy as we know it because matter and of energy can not be eternal and unchanging. So as implausible at it seems the only thing that fits the requirements is spirit or consciousness without form. It is mind which has created a material world so that beings that know and create would eventually arise.

 

[OldLady]

Simulation theory Is an excellent analog for our existence. There was a creator, there was a beginning of the creation and we were given the attributes of the creator.

The argument that simulation theory does not address the first cause conundrum is valid.

We know from logic that the only solution to what came before that is something which had no beginning. Which means it was eternal. We know from logic the only thing that can be eternal is something which is unchanging.

From these attributes we know that the first cause cannot be matter and energy as we know it because matter and of energy can not be eternal and unchanging. So as implausible at it seems the only thing that fits the requirements is spirit or consciousness without form. It is mind which has created a material world so that beings that know and create would eventually arise.

Finally, someone offers a bit of the argument underpinning dualism. I've been curious. Thanks, Ding.

 

[G.T.]

Simulation theory Is an excellent analog for our existence. There was a creator, there was a beginning of the creation and we were given the attributes of the creator.

The argument that simulation theory does not address the first cause conundrum is valid.

We know from logic that the only solution to what came before that is something which had no beginning. Which means it was eternal. We know from logic the only thing that can be eternal is something which is unchanging.

From these attributes we know that the first cause cannot be matter and energy as we know it because matter and of energy can not be eternal and unchanging. So as implausible at it seems the only thing that fits the requirements is spirit or consciousness without form. It is mind which has created a material world so that beings that know and create would eventually arise.

Finally, someone offers a bit of the argument underpinning dualism. I've been curious. Thanks, Ding.

Weird response.

 

[OldLady]

Simulation theory Is an excellent analog for our existence. There was a creator, there was a beginning of the creation and we were given the attributes of the creator.

The argument that simulation theory does not address the first cause conundrum is valid.

We know from logic that the only solution to what came before that is something which had no beginning. Which means it was eternal. We know from logic the only thing that can be eternal is something which is unchanging.

From these attributes we know that the first cause cannot be matter and energy as we know it because matter and of energy can not be eternal and unchanging. So as implausible at it seems the only thing that fits the requirements is spirit or consciousness without form. It is mind which has created a material world so that beings that know and create would eventually arise.

Finally, someone offers a bit of the argument underpinning dualism. I've been curious. Thanks, Ding.

Weird response.

How so?

 

[G.T.]

Simulation theory Is an excellent analog for our existence. There was a creator, there was a beginning of the creation and we were given the attributes of the creator.

The argument that simulation theory does not address the first cause conundrum is valid.

We know from logic that the only solution to what came before that is something which had no beginning. Which means it was eternal. We know from logic the only thing that can be eternal is something which is unchanging.

From these attributes we know that the first cause cannot be matter and energy as we know it because matter and of energy can not be eternal and unchanging. So as implausible at it seems the only thing that fits the requirements is spirit or consciousness without form. It is mind which has created a material world so that beings that know and create would eventually arise.

Finally, someone offers a bit of the argument underpinning dualism. I've been curious. Thanks, Ding.

Weird response.

How so?

ohhh i'd tell ya in p-m if you cared that much to know - but it's not that important to me. lol

 

[ding]

Simulation theory Is an excellent analog for our existence. There was a creator, there was a beginning of the creation and we were given the attributes of the creator.

The argument that simulation theory does not address the first cause conundrum is valid.

We know from logic that the only solution to what came before that is something which had no beginning. Which means it was eternal. We know from logic the only thing that can be eternal is something which is unchanging.

From these attributes we know that the first cause cannot be matter and energy as we know it because matter and of energy can not be eternal and unchanging. So as implausible at it seems the only thing that fits the requirements is spirit or consciousness without form. It is mind which has created a material world so that beings that know and create would eventually arise.

Finally, someone offers a bit of the argument underpinning dualism. I've been curious. Thanks, Ding.

To me there is no argument because of spirituality. There is no doubt that people are spiritual. There is also no doubt that the material world exists. So materialists believe that there is only the material world and that everything proceeded from the material world even spirituality. Materialists believe that spirituality is nothing more than electrochemical reactions in the brain. Like your college professor said.

Whereas dualist believe that there are spirits which did not proceed from the material world. Deists would be an example of that. They believe in the material world and a spiritual world so to speak although none of us can know what that is really like.

I am sure there are dualists that believe in spirituality but don’t believe in a spiritual world so to speak. I think they are just fooling themselves when they call themselves dualists. They are really materialists.

 

[ding]

So when the OP states the case for duslism hasn’t been made what he is really saying is that the case for spirituality not proceeding from the material world hasn’t been made.

But it has. He just doesn’t accept it.

 

[OldLady]

So when the OP states the case for duslism hasn’t been made what he is really saying is that the case for spirituality not proceeding from the material world hasn’t been made.

But it has. He just doesn’t accept it.

Who made that case, Ding, for spirituality not proceeding from the material world?

 

[ding]

So when the OP states the case for duslism hasn’t been made what he is really saying is that the case for spirituality not proceeding from the material world hasn’t been made.

But it has. He just doesn’t accept it.

Who made that case, Ding, for spirituality not proceeding from the material world?

Ancient man was the first to state it. Aquinas was the first to prove it through logic but I’m partial to my argument which is based on the physical, biological and moral laws of nature.

 

[G.T.]

Damn, this site is really short on folks who enjoy philosophy.