Do you materialists care?

[bunny]

Do those of you who believe that the universe is entirely governed by physical laws actually care about what happens? I am addressing this to the hardcore materialists who believe that your thoughts, emotions and actions are entirely determined by physical processes worked out in your brain, in accordance with impersonal, amoral laws of the universe.

[madnak]

Um... yes? Obviously I care about what happens. I don't see why I wouldn't.

[amirite]

I care, but then again I can't choose not to.

[Smock8]

[ QUOTE ]
I care, but then again I can't choose not to.

[/ QUOTE ]

[bunny]

I wondered why you care? I am a dualist and believe that my mind operates independantly of physical laws - that I can make a decision that isnt determined by physical processes in my brain forcing me to act in a certain way.

The reason for my question, is that if I conceived of the world as a giant clock, working itself out according to immutable, amoral laws - I just wouldnt care what happened. It would all happen as it would happen. I believe we make choices and that these are not determined by physical processes responding to physical laws. This is a big part of why I care about what other people choose and about what happens to them - so that I can choose to live well. I just wondered why a materialist would care

[Lestat]

Not sure what you mean... I'm stuck 10 dimes so far this month and yeah, I friggin CARE!

[amirite]

Hey, none of that now. No emotion from you, fellow materialist, you're supposed to be an automaton or something, apparently.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey, none of that now. No emotion from you, fellow materialist, you're supposed to be an automaton or something, apparently.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesnt the materialist position claim we are all effectively automatons?

[madnak]

I'm not sure how that follows. If I play roulette I have no control over the outcome. But I still hope to win. And I do have control over the outcome in life - the fact that the part of me making choices is governed by physical laws doesn't mean that I'm not making choices.

[madnak]

No. I have feelings and thoughts, automatons don't. That represents one critical difference to me.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure what you mean... I'm stuck 10 dimes so far this month and yeah, I friggin CARE!

[/ QUOTE ]

What I mean is why does it matter? Your loss was just a working out of physical laws, even the emotion you feel about it was just a result of those laws. Why would it make any difference if things were any other way?

[madnak]

My emotions are a result of physical laws, but they're still my emotions. I don't understand how that makes them any less valid.

I can easily tell you why it would make a difference for me. If you're asking why it would make a difference in a universal, absolute, or divine sense? I have no reason to believe it would. I live my life to please me, not to please the Absolute.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
No. I have feelings and thoughts, automatons don't. That represents one critical difference to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

And do you believe that you couldnt have felt any other way? Or thought anything different? That any choice you made was an inevitable result of electrons zooming around in particular ways in your brain or whatever?

To me - this is a depressing thing if it is true. It feels to me like I am making a choice and could have chosen otherwise. I also believe it to be true (although I accept that my feelings are completely valueless as evidence for dualism).

This thread isnt an attempt to insult materialism, merely an attempt to understand how materialists can be happy

[amirite]

Absolutely. We may not be able to control what they are, but we have them. That alone seems enough to make a difference.

[Lestat]

So are you implying that one should only care what happens if free will exists?

Why?

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
So are you implying that one should only care what happens if free will exists?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not really implying it is a demonstrable fact - merely saying that it seems true for me.

[ QUOTE ]
Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps an illustration will explain why. I have been a teacher and it was fascinating to watch my students (predominantly teenagers) grappling with philosophical ideas, argue against them or for them, misunderstand them, rethink about it and gradually develop an understanding. As they grew in their wisdom I felt a certain pride, admiration or some other warm fuzzy feeling in watching them develop.

When I was at uni (i did philosophy and pure maths) a friend of mine was working in artificial intelligence and wrote a computer program that was supposed to learn a vocabulary from getting a bunch of input (english texts), applying some computer-geekish kind of rules, giving some output, receiving input based on that output and so on.

It had some success and he was happy - I had none of the same feelings when a computer did essentially the same thing as my students did. Obviously, the scale is completely different and maybe a computer program as complicated as a child may invoke the same feelings in me as a child - but it seems unlikely to me.

Ultimately, I think what the computer did and what the children did were fundamentally different because the children were thinking and the computer was processing a bunch of rules (which I do not believe to be the same).

If the universe was just a bunch of rules - it would not be very compelling viewing to me.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
Absolutely. We may not be able to control what they are, but we have them. That alone seems enough to make a difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

And other people's emotions are important also? Even though they are just the outcomes of their neurons firing in particular ways according to laws of chemistry/physics/etc?

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
And do you believe that you couldnt have felt any other way? Or thought anything different? That any choice you made was an inevitable result of electrons zooming around in particular ways in your brain or whatever?

[/ QUOTE ]

Essentially.

[ QUOTE ]
To me - this is a depressing thing if it is true. It feels to me like I am making a choice and could have chosen otherwise. I also believe it to be true (although I accept that my feelings are completely valueless as evidence for dualism).

This thread isnt an attempt to insult materialism, merely an attempt to understand how materialists can be happy

[/ QUOTE ]

Far from depressing me, determinism (I don't consider myself a materialist per se) has made me happier.

[Lestat]

<font color="blue"> I think what the computer did and what the children did were fundamentally different because the children were thinking and the computer was processing a bunch of rules (which I do not believe to be the same). </font>

Well then what do you think the human brain is doing if not processing a bunch of rules?

No offense, but this is where your theism skewers your view on things. You have been predisposed to believe there MUST be more to our us, to our thoughts, than neurons firing and processing information. I believe you are wrong and so do many top psychologists.

A good book if you haven't already read it is "How the Mind Works", by Steven Pinker. He explains in precise detail the types of examples you just gave and why the conclusion you reached observing your students Vs. your friend's computer program is most assuredly wrong.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
Far from depressing me, determinism (I don't consider myself a materialist per se) has made me happier.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is off topic but it's my thread so I guess that's allowed(?):

I'm interested in why you consider yourself a determinist (given that some of the current physical theories are non-deterministic) and not a materialist? Do you believe in something non-physical?

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue"> I think what the computer did and what the children did were fundamentally different because the children were thinking and the computer was processing a bunch of rules (which I do not believe to be the same). </font>

Well then what do you think the human brain is doing if not processing a bunch of rules?

No offense, but this is where your theism skewers your view on things. You have been predisposed to believe there MUST be more to our us, to our thoughts, than neurons firing and processing information. I believe you are wrong and so do many top psychologists.

A good book if you haven't already read it is "How the Mind Works", by Steven Pinker. He explains in precise detail the types of examples you just gave and why the conclusion you reached observing your students Vs. your friend's computer program is most assuredly wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

*grin* I have read Pinker (and I disagree with him, obviously) as well has several of his defenders and critics - I do think "assuredly wrong" is a little strong as his thesis is relatively new and hardly established scientific theory. On a side note, my theism came later, in fact - my dualism is what has "skewered my view on things".

I accept that materialism is defensible (although it is also debatable) and didnt mean to begin a materialism vs dualism debate. I was merely curious as to how materialists cared.

[madnak]

I started a really long post here. And decided that it would have been silly.

Basically, I think the probability of the existence of something that would be described today as "non-physical" is very high.

[hmkpoker]

Physical materials create sensations, emotions, friends, drugs and hookers that I enjoy.

So yes, I care.

[Lestat]

I admit "assuredly" wrong was a little strong, but the guy makes a lot of sense to me.

What is your background? Do you teach philosophy?

[Nielsio]

The only reason we can care is because of causality. If reality is subjective there is no reason to do anything.

The fact that everything is predetermined doesn't mean we know exactly what's going to happen. We do predict things all the time though, and this is always, always, always because of the presumption of causality.

The reason that moral responsibility exists is because your actions are a reflection of _you_. If there is no relation between you and what you do (what you like to call 'free will'), then there can absolutely be no moral responsibility.

And lastly: reality isn't dependent on your thoughts, so think whatever you want, but don't claim to be rational about empiricism.

[ZeeJustin]

You're asking us why we avoid pain, or want happiness. I suppose it all has to do with the chemistry of our brains.

Survival of the fittest would imply a successful species like our own would be likely to survive because it does care. A species that cares is certainly more likely to survive than one that doesn't.

You could say that as a species we are designed to care about survival.

If orgasms were painful and accompanied by severe depression, we wouldn't exactly keep the species alive.

So basically, we care because our DNA is coded to make us care, and there's nothing we can do about it.

[Smock8]

[ QUOTE ]
I wondered why you care? I am a dualist and believe that my mind operates independantly of physical laws - that I can make a decision that isnt determined by physical processes in my brain forcing me to act in a certain way.

The reason for my question, is that if I conceived of the world as a giant clock, working itself out according to immutable, amoral laws - I just wouldnt care what happened. It would all happen as it would happen. I believe we make choices and that these are not determined by physical processes responding to physical laws. This is a big part of why I care about what other people choose and about what happens to them - so that I can choose to live well. I just wondered why a materialist would care

[/ QUOTE ]

Given that you are a dualist it can still be argued that ultimately you are not truely making decisions. Think about what makes you make one decision or another. All decisions are based on past experiances and depending wether you believe it or not genetic influences.
If you base your decisions on past experiances, it is really the interplay between your past experiances with your mind that makes the decision. All of your experiences were either because of a decision that you made or because of something that was not in your control. Those experiances were due to the same things and so on and so forth until you go way back to when you were a baby, or in the womb or whatever and you had no control.
Your mind that assimilates all of these experiances and executes a decision based on them would just be the sum of all of your experience and some special spark or whatever you want to call it. The spark was something you inherently had when your mind came into existence so really you have no control over the spark, no control over your experiences and therefore no control over your decisions.

So... Why do you care?

[billygrippo]

[ QUOTE ]
The only reason we can care is because of causality. If reality is subjective there is no reason to do anything.

[/ QUOTE ] huh?

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that everything is predetermined doesn't mean we know exactly what's going to happen. We do predict things all the time though, and this is always, always, always because of the presumption of causality.

[/ QUOTE ]

everything being predetermined is a fact? show me this proof please.


[ QUOTE ]
And lastly: reality isn't dependent on your thoughts, so think whatever you want, but don't claim to be rational about empiricism.

[/ QUOTE ]

didnt you just make a fact w/ your thoughts?!

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
I admit "assuredly" wrong was a little strong, but the guy makes a lot of sense to me.

What is your background? Do you teach philosophy?

[/ QUOTE ]

My undergraduate study was mathematical physics initially, then I drifted into pure maths and philosophy. Post-graduate I did exclusively pure maths and (for a little while) taught maths. Now I'm doing a post-graduate degree in accounting, which is also the field in which I work currently.

Pinker makes sense to me as well - and I may ultimately end up agreeing with him. For now, I am unconvinced largely due to an inherent bias against "scientific" theories which reconstruct a history to explain facts without making any real predictions.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
You're asking us why we avoid pain, or want happiness. I suppose it all has to do with the chemistry of our brains.

Survival of the fittest would imply a successful species like our own would be likely to survive because it does care. A species that cares is certainly more likely to survive than one that doesn't.

You could say that as a species we are designed to care about survival.

If orgasms were painful and accompanied by severe depression, we wouldn't exactly keep the species alive.

So basically, we care because our DNA is coded to make us care, and there's nothing we can do about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand this position - I am curious whether you find it satisfying though? To me the idea that I am only experiencing this joy because I am programmed to or that the pride I feel in creating something (along with the choices and decisions I made in the creating itself) is nothing more than chemical reactions that happened due to amoral, immutable laws of physics - this world view would make me depressed.

I accept it is consistent with what we observe about the world, it's not my belief though. My question is does this world-view make you happy? Am I right in understanding that you dont see any real point in my question - we feel what we feel and just because that is the result of physical processes we have no control over doesnt make the experiences any less real or valuable?

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I wondered why you care? I am a dualist and believe that my mind operates independantly of physical laws - that I can make a decision that isnt determined by physical processes in my brain forcing me to act in a certain way.

The reason for my question, is that if I conceived of the world as a giant clock, working itself out according to immutable, amoral laws - I just wouldnt care what happened. It would all happen as it would happen. I believe we make choices and that these are not determined by physical processes responding to physical laws. This is a big part of why I care about what other people choose and about what happens to them - so that I can choose to live well. I just wondered why a materialist would care

[/ QUOTE ]

Given that you are a dualist it can still be argued that ultimately you are not truely making decisions. Think about what makes you make one decision or another. All decisions are based on past experiances and depending wether you believe it or not genetic influences.
If you base your decisions on past experiances, it is really the interplay between your past experiances with your mind that makes the decision. All of your experiences were either because of a decision that you made or because of something that was not in your control. Those experiances were due to the same things and so on and so forth until you go way back to when you were a baby, or in the womb or whatever and you had no control.
Your mind that assimilates all of these experiances and executes a decision based on them would just be the sum of all of your experience and some special spark or whatever you want to call it. The spark was something you inherently had when your mind came into existence so really you have no control over the spark, no control over your experiences and therefore no control over your decisions.

So... Why do you care?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is true you can have a deterministic view of dualism but it is not essential (and isnt the one I have). I care because I believe each decision I make is not solely determined by previous experiences/decisions/etc. I believe there is a non-physical, spiritual,whatever..."thing" which uses past experiences, rational thought, irrational thought, input from my physical body, etc to make decisions. I believe it's not solely using those things though - that I have a certain nature, predisposition, strengths and weaknesses, whatever that is also present. To me this is why I find life valuable - because there is "something" deciding and experiencing.

Clearly this whole thread is not an attempt to persuade you, nor do I make the claim that this position is obviously true. It is just quite central to why I care when millions of people I've never met starve to death. Or why I grin when I watch someone on TV experiencing joy on the otherside of the world.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
My emotions are a result of physical laws, but they're still my emotions. I don't understand how that makes them any less valid.

[/ QUOTE ]
I more mean other people's emotions. I care about what happens to you because, in my view, you are a thinking being making choices and experiencing emotions as an autonomous individual. If I conceived of other people as complicated clockwork mechanisms whose thoughts, emotions and actions were determined by physical laws - then I think I would not feel compassion for them (although it is hard for me to conceive of how I would feel in this scenario).

[ QUOTE ]
I can easily tell you why it would make a difference for me. If you're asking why it would make a difference in a universal, absolute, or divine sense? I have no reason to believe it would. I live my life to please me, not to please the Absolute.

[/ QUOTE ]
Am I correct in understanding that you ultimately dont care about the question I am posing? Namely that if emotions, feelings and thoughts are completely determined by physical laws and there is nothing else governing our decisions it doesnt matter because you still feel like you are making choices and that is just as valuable?

[madnak]

I care about the suffering of others. They feel just like I do. I don't know if I consider compassion very rational in the first place, but humans don't always think rationally, even if we do function according to causal rules. I don't think I could have such a cold view of people as machines if I tried (even though the analogy is essentially valid).

You are correct in your understanding. I would act no differently if I believed in free will (outside of debates like this, of course).

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
My question is does this world-view make you happy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. I'm quite happy. I don't need some higher meaning to justify my life. I enjoy my life, and that's enough for me. Why does anything else matter?