Materialism is either redundant or unlikely

[Bahman]

Consider a close system being in a given state, S, universe for example. We say that S can cause another state S’ by means of S’=L(S) where L is causality operator. We say that S can also cause a mental state M, what is observed, by means of M=P(S). As M indicates S and S’ cannot however coexist hence there must exist a S for each instant. Hence materialism is true if there exist an universe for each instance. We however observe a fantastic precision between S’ and M always using different mode of senses or individual experiences. There is no reason to think that different individual experiences should match to each other to such a great precision. This means that materialism is very unlikely. This likelihood can be improved if one assume that there exist infinite realities, ours is one of them which it behaves in a very specific way which means that materialism is redundant.

 

[Vico]

Consider a close system being in a given state, S, universe for example. We say that S can cause another state S’ by means of S’=L(S) where L is causality operator. We say that S can also cause a mental state M, what is observed, by means of M=P(S). As M indicates S and S’ cannot however coexist hence there must exist a S for each instant. Hence materialism is true if there exist an universe for each instance. We however observe a fantastic precision between S’ and M always using different mode of senses or individual experiences. There is no reason to think that different individual experiences should match to each other to such a great precision. This means that materialism is very unlikely. This likelihood can be improved if one assume that there exist infinite realities, ours is one of them which it behaves in a very specific way which means that materialism is redundant.

There are a few dogmas defined at Vatican I pertaining to materialism.

On God the creator of all things

1. If anyone denies the one true God, creator and lord of things visible and invisible: let him be anathema.
2. If anyone is so bold as to assert that there exists nothing besides matter: let him be anathema.
3. If anyone says that the substance or essence of God and that of all things are one and the same: let him be anathema.
4. If anyone says that finite things, both corporal and spiritual, or at any rate, spiritual, emanated from the divine substance; or that the divine essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself becomes all things or, finally, that God is a universal or indefinite being which by self determination establishes the totality of things distinct in genera, species and individuals:let him be anathema.
5. If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole substance, out of nothing by God; or holds that God did not create by his will free from all necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves himself; or denies that the world was created for the glory of God: let him be anathema.

 

[IWantGod]

Consider a close system being in a given state, S, universe for example. We say that S can cause another state S’ by means of S’=L(S) where L is causality operator. We say that S can also cause a mental state M, what is observed, by means of M=P(S). As M indicates S and S’ cannot however coexist hence there must exist a S for each instant. Hence materialism is true if there exist an universe for each instance. We however observe a fantastic precision between S’ and M always using different mode of senses or individual experiences. There is no reason to think that different individual experiences should match to each other to such a great precision. This means that materialism is very unlikely. This likelihood can be improved if one assume that there exist infinite realities, ours is one of them which it behaves in a very specific way which means that materialism is redundant.

Please explain this a bit more. Are you saying that materialism is unlikely if we all see or sense the same thing? If so why does that make materialism unlikely?

 

[Bahman]

Please explain this a bit more. Are you saying that materialism is unlikely if we all see or sense the same thing? If so why does that make materialism unlikely?

No, what I am saying is that there is always a fantastic correlation between what we experience (M) and what is caused (S’) hence materialism cannot be real.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

No, what I am saying is that there is always a fantastic correlation between what we experience (M) and what is caused (S’) hence materialism cannot be real.

I’m missing how you get from your (M) and (S’) to materialism cannot to be real. What might I be missing?

 

[Bahman]

I’m missing how you get from your (M) and (S’) to materialism cannot to be real. What might I be missing?

S’ is uniquely is defined from S by law of nature. M is also caused from S. M is the mental state and informs us about S’. The problem is that there is fantastic correlation between state of S’ and our mental state of S’, M.