What is the Nature of an idea?

[IWantGod]

Ideas, concepts, and meaning, seem to be very different things by nature in comparison to what we describe as physical processes.

I would not describe my self as a strict Cartesian Dualist, but i think an honest analysis of human experience in relation to the operations of the human brain inevitably leads to some kind of duality which cannot be explained by or reduced to physical operations alone.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

I dont think of it in terms of duality but rather a spectrum. We dont say something is either biological or chemical because chemistry is the substance of biology. There are different levels of the same thing. An idea is in the deeper realm of our being. There is no need for a physical/non physical dualism. The boundary is on of our perceptions. With the help of technology we have seen that boundary pushed.

 

[thephilosopher6]

Ideas, concepts, and meaning, seem to be very different things by nature in comparison to what we describe as physical processes.

I would not describe my self as a strict Cartesian Dualist, but i think an honest analysis of human experience in relation to the operations of the human brain inevitably leads to some kind of duality which cannot be explained by or reduced to physical operations alone.

Either Hume or Kant will answer that best for you.

 

[IWantGod]

I dont think of it in terms of duality but rather a spectrum. We dont say something is either biological or chemical because chemistry is the substance of biology. There are different levels of the same thing. An idea is in the deeper realm of our being. There is no need for a physical/non physical dualism. The boundary is on of our perceptions. With the help of technology we have seen that boundary pushed.

So you go for a kind of physicalism or monist view.

The problem, the problem is that when i make a decision it begins with my concept of self and then the brain reacts to my sense of “i” and because of that i don’t see how a natural process, an non-directed process, can be effected by a “self directing influence” without considering an ontological distinction between the two acts. My sense of self appears to be irreducible.

The difficulty is explaining how a natural process can become a self directing process without introducing a new nature that is distinct from natural processes…

Things like meaning and truth represent unquantifiable aspects of human experience. I can say that something is true or false but there is nothing true or false about the properties that make up the brain. There is not a physical object in the brain that is truth.

 

[GEddie]

It would not seem to me to require dualism.

Ideas, thoughts and memories are the product of a mind, which resides in a solid head. QED.

ICXC NIKA

 

[GEddie]

So you go for a kind of physicalism or monist view.

The problem, the problem is that when i make a decision it begins with my concept of self and then the brain reacts to my sense of “i” and because of that i don’t see how a natural process, an non-directed process, can be effected by a “self directing influence” without considering an ontological distinction between the two acts. My sense of self appears to be irreducible.

The difficulty is explaining how a natural process can become a self directing process without introducing a new nature that is distinct from natural processes…

Things like meaning and truth represent unquantifiable aspects of human experience. I can say that something is true or false but there is nothing true or false about the properties that make up the brain. There is not a physical object in the brain that is truth.

The most important thing to remember about the truth is that you can’t handle it!



ICXC NIKA

 

[Greekrhetoric]

The most important thing to remember about the truth is that you can’t handle it!



ICXC NIKA

Perfect!!!

 

[thephilosopher6]

So you go for a kind of physicalism or monist view.

The problem, the problem is that when i make a decision it begins with my concept of self and then the brain reacts to my sense of “i” and because of that i don’t see how a natural process, an non-directed process, can be effected by a “self directing influence” without considering an ontological distinction between the two acts. My sense of self appears to be irreducible.

The difficulty is explaining how a natural process can become a self directing process without introducing a new nature that is distinct from natural processes…

I think this relates to a problem within naturalism, which may seem straight forward at first, but really runs into problems when you attempt to verify it as a valid idea according to itself. If everything is directed towards survival and natural selection, then that means naturalism isn’t a valid idea just like any other idea, it too is just something that helps us survive, there cannot be self-directing process behind it if everything is reliant on nature, and if one attempts to give is that status, then it is no longer naturalism, it really only ends up negating itself.

 

[STT]

Ideas, concepts, and meaning, seem to be very different things by nature in comparison to what we describe as physical processes.

Ideas, concepts and meaning are of course manifestation of physical process.

I would not describe my self as a strict Cartesian Dualist, but i think an honest analysis of human experience in relation to the operations of the human brain inevitably leads to some kind of duality which cannot be explained by or reduced to physical operations alone.

The only problem in naturalist view is the free will.

 

[thephilosopher6]

The only problem in naturalist view is the free will.

And with the lack of free will, naturalism collapses in on itself.

 

[STT]

And with the lack of free will, naturalism collapses in on itself.

There could exist a system which its behavior not predictable if the number of laws of nature is infinite. This is what I call weak condition for freedom. That is the only way I can say it now.

 

[GEddie]

And with the lack of free will, naturalism collapses in on itself.

Are we really so afraid to consider that free-will may be in large part a mirage?

 

[PseuTonym]

Ideas, concepts and meaning are of course manifestation of physical process.

What is your idea of the number 49?

Some possibilities:

#1 Consider the following process: start with one hundred. Divide by 2. Then subtract one. The result is 49.

#2 Consider the following process: multiply 7 by 7. The result is 49.

#3 Consider the following process: begin with 40. Add 9. The result is 49.

One problem is that the above processes aren’t physical, are they? Each possibility was expressed in terms of some constants and some operations, but they are arithmetical constants and arithmetical operations. They aren’t physical operations or physical constants.

You could say that an author embodies some ideas in physical form when writing a manuscript. However, if the author uses a secret code, then the physical form discloses no ideas to you. The physical form unlocks an idea only to those who have the key of language.

Are writing systems and spoken languages manifestations of a physical process?

 

[STT]

What is your idea of the number 49?

Some possibilities:

#1 Consider the following process: start with one hundred. Divide by 2. Then subtract one. The result is 49.

#2 Consider the following process: multiply 7 by 7. The result is 49.

#3 Consider the following process: begin with 40. Add 9. The result is 49.

One problem is that the above processes aren’t physical, are they? Each possibility was expressed in terms of some constants and some operations, but they are arithmetical constants and arithmetical operations. They aren’t physical operations or physical constants.

You could say that an author embodies some ideas in physical form when writing a manuscript. However, if the author uses a secret code, then the physical form discloses no ideas to you. The physical form unlocks an idea only to those who have the key of language.

Are writing systems and spoken languages manifestations of a physical process?

Concepts in general are conscious physical state, resulting from physical process, which could be perceived and comprehend with an intelligent agent.

Language of course is a causal system which allows two agents interact intellectually.

 

[PseuTonym]

Concepts in general are conscious physical state, resulting from physical process, which could be perceived and comprehend with an intelligent agent.

I think that a written word is perceived and – given the context of a clear sentence that the word occurs in – some concept is comprehended.

Do you claim that all processes are physical?

Language of course is a causal system which allows two agents interact intellectually.

What is a “causal system”?
Two people could interact intellectually via a physical board game, such as checkers or chess. On that basis do you conclude that a chess set is a “causal system”?

 

[STT]

Do you claim that all processes are physical?

Things/physicals could be static or dynamic (such as process).

What is a “causal system”?

A system it which an state of affair, A for example, causes another state of affair, B for example.

Two people could interact intellectually via a physical board game, such as checkers or chess. On that basis do you conclude that a chess set is a “causal system”?

Yes, it is.

 

[thephilosopher6]

Are we really so afraid to consider that free-will may be in large part a mirage?

Free will is essential to the Christian faith.

 

[IWantGod]

Ideas, concepts and meaning are of course manifestation of physical process…

And not you as a self-directed influence. Its just non-directed processes. And according to you ideas concepts and meaning are physical entities. .

Your very smart STT. I feel jealous.

The only problem in naturalist view is the free will.

You don’t say!!

 

[IWantGod]

There could exist a system which its behavior not predictable if the number of laws of nature is infinite. This is what I call weak condition for freedom. That is the only way I can say it now.

A random event is not the same thing as a self-directed process.

 

[IWantGod]

What is your idea of the number 49?

Some possibilities:

#1 Consider the following process: start with one hundred. Divide by 2. Then subtract one. The result is 49.

#2 Consider the following process: multiply 7 by 7. The result is 49.

#3 Consider the following process: begin with 40. Add 9. The result is 49.

One problem is that the above processes aren’t physical, are they? Each possibility was expressed in terms of some constants and some operations, but they are arithmetical constants and arithmetical operations. They aren’t physical operations or physical constants.

You could say that an author embodies some ideas in physical form when writing a manuscript. However, if the author uses a secret code, then the physical form discloses no ideas to you. The physical form unlocks an idea only to those who have the key of language.

Are writing systems and spoken languages manifestations of a physical process?