Can materialism explain human experience?

B

BidenPresident

Verified User
Dennett’s commitment to materialism leads him to regard his immediate first-person awareness of his own experiences as merely a set of beliefs, rather than the direct apprehension of something that is really happening. When I bite into a chocolate bar, I get a pleasant taste sensation of a particular subjective quality.

It seems undeniable that, in having it, I am aware of the real quality of this experience. But that is just what Dennett denies. He denies the authority of the first-person point of view.

https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-essay/2023/10/philosopher-daniel-dennett
 
Dennett doesn’t reject the label “behaviourist”. As he says,

“Science is a sort of behaviourism; once you’ve got a scientific explanation of all the behaviour, inner and outer, large and microscopic, of any phenomenon, there’s nothing else to explain – except why some people are so uncomfortable with your explanation!”

I find it truly extraordinary that Dennett can regard the appearance from the inside of what is going on in his own mind as an illusion, overridden by a theory constructed from the outside. Only a philosopher could convince himself of something so implausible.

https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-essay/2023/10/philosopher-daniel-dennett
 
BidenPresident said:
Dennett’s commitment to materialism leads him to regard his immediate first-person awareness of his own experiences as merely a set of beliefs,
Click to expand...
Then Dennett has a philosphical quandary right off the bat. He can only say that he merely believes that his immediate first-person awareness of his own experiences are merely beliefs. But wait, he can really only say that he merely believes that he merely believes that his immediate first-person awareness of his own experiences are merely beliefs. Wait, I spoke too soon. He can only say that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that his immediate first-person awareness of his own experiences are merely beliefs. Correction, he can only say that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that his immediate first-person awareness of his own experiences are merely beliefs. Actually, what I meant to write is that he can only say that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that his immediate first-person awareness of his own experiences are merely beliefs.

This goes on forever. Dennett cannot accurately express his view given the time the universe has remaining before dying a heat death.

BidenPresident said:
When I bite into a chocolate bar, I get a pleasant taste sensation of a particular subjective quality.
Click to expand...
So Dennett merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes ... [infinite loop] ... that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he merely believes that he is biting into a chocolate bar.

Strangely, Dennett's view becomes one-level closer to any conventional view when it comes to viewing optical illusions, i.e. one only believes that one sees what one believes one believes one sees, or something like that.
 
BidenPresident said:
Dennett’s commitment to materialism leads him to regard his immediate first-person awareness of his own experiences as merely a set of beliefs, rather than the direct apprehension of something that is really happening. When I bite into a chocolate bar, I get a pleasant taste sensation of a particular subjective quality.

It seems undeniable that, in having it, I am aware of the real quality of this experience. But that is just what Dennett denies. He denies the authority of the first-person point of view.

https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-essay/2023/10/philosopher-daniel-dennett
Click to expand...

A universe that is based on nothing but physical facts and their underlying physics does not adequately explain the subjective concious experience of color, music, taste, let alone abstract concepts of liberty, equality, mercy.
 
BidenPresident said:
Physicalists mistake the necessary condition of material with an explanation of the event.
Click to expand...

They feel and believe that physical facts have unlimited explanatory power.

A blind person can become a world expert on the physics of optics, the wavelengths, frequency, and energy of visible light.

But they will never have the knowledge of what Red looks like.
 
BidenPresident said:
Physicalists mistake the necessary condition of material with an explanation of the event.
Click to expand...

Every one of those things listed has a physical correlate that can be identified by measurement in things like MRI's and PET scans. Chemically they are understandable as well through dopamine or other neurotransmitters.

None of those things listed exists without a physical brain attached. Ergo there is no evidence that those things exist apart from a physical brain.
 
LiAlSi2O6 said:
Every one of those things listed has a physical correlate that can be identified by measurement in things like MRI's and PET scans. Chemically they are understandable as well through dopamine or other neurotransmitters.

None of those things listed exists without a physical brain attached. Ergo there is no evidence that those things exist apart from a physical brain.
Click to expand...

Never said they exist without physicality.
 
LiAlSi2O6 said:
And you don't have the knowledge of what red looks like to me. (That's basic color science. Why do you think the CIE in the 1930's set up their color mixing experiments?)
Click to expand...

Thanks for agreeing that I was right from the start.

Being an expert in all the physical facts of optics, acoustics, and electromagnetic radiation provides no explanation of the subjective concious experience of color and sound
 
Cypress said:
Thanks for agreeing that I was right from the start.
Click to expand...

You don't even know what I'm talking about.

Being an expert in all the physical facts of optics, acoustics, and electromagnetic radiation provides no explanation of the subjective concious experience of color and sound
Click to expand...

But being an expert on the brain and it's function would.
 
LiAlSi2O6 said:
Then explain the CIE experiments to me.
Click to expand...

First post a body of peer reviewed research that shows the scholarly consensus is that CIE proves the explanation for subjective concious experience.
Physical facts are not an explanation of first principles

And don't just frantically google links without reading them or being able to explain them, like last time
 
LiAlSi2O6 said:
Then explain the CIE experiments to me.
Click to expand...

First post a body of peer reviewed research that shows the scholarly consensus is that CIE proves the explanation for subjective concious experience.
Physical facts are not an explanation of first principles

And don't just frantically google links without reading them or being able to explain them, like last time
 
Cypress said:
A universe that is based on nothing but physical facts and their underlying physics does not adequately explain the subjective concious experience of color, music, taste, let alone abstract concepts of liberty, equality, mercy.
Click to expand...
So, if we delete your "no true Scotsman" fallacy, we are all in agreement that science of the physical universe nonetheless explains the subjective conscious experience of color, music, taste and abstract concepts.

You should ditch the fallacies. They are not your friends. I'm not saying that anyone else is, just that fallacies are not.
 
BidenPresident said:
Dennett’s commitment to materialism leads him to regard his immediate first-person awareness of his own experiences as merely a set of beliefs, rather than the direct apprehension of something that is really happening. When I bite into a chocolate bar, I get a pleasant taste sensation of a particular subjective quality.

It seems undeniable that, in having it, I am aware of the real quality of this experience. But that is just what Dennett denies. He denies the authority of the first-person point of view.

https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-essay/2023/10/philosopher-daniel-dennett
Click to expand...

There you go again, masquerading as an educated person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top