Lonergan-- Proving the metaphysical by thinking about thinking

[FightingFat]

1: if concepts and thoughts exist independent of the individual, then what is an “individual” - what is “identity”? Do all of our lifes thoughts and reflections exist already, and we merely trigger them at given moments?

2: what is lacking in a materialistic explanation of consciousness that doesn’t account for the observable phenomena of sentience? If all phenomena can be accounted for in this way, then isn’t that sufficient?

3: if a materialist explanation of sentience isn’t sufficient, why? What aspects of consciousness does it fail to explain?

4: What is the process of thinking, where does it start?

 

[theAuthor]

1. An interesting question. Neither a thought nor an idea can exist independently of the brain, since both are functions of the brain. However, for a strict materialist, the concept of free-will is probably the most troubling. For if all thoughts and decisions are functions of brain chemistry, then we are merely wet robots. The same problem would exist with creativity. Creativity can only be an illusion if all our thoughts and actions are deterministic.

Another thing is that some concepts AFAIK cannot be explained by materialism. What is the SI unit for justice? How can a materialist answer a moral dilema? Can anyone be held accountable for being bad if their murderous actions were merely an action of their brain chemistry/ neural pathways and therefore not chosen? If we are completely deterministic, then none should be held accountable!

2 and 3. Science has not yet explained sentience fully. Materialists just have faith that one day science will be able to fully explain self-awareness and other aspects of consciousness by neurophysiology. That has not happened yet. All materialists can do is say that science is progressive and that they believe it will one day do so.

A nice quote:

“I am not interested in free will”- Richard Dawkins.