Hello

[Theophilus]

Hi there

I'm a big fan of science, but feel that materialism will always be limited in scope in what it can explain, so I comfortably combine materialist and non-materialistic philosophies and theologies. I look forward to some good discussions.

P.S. I think I was "Quantal" on the RD forum, but that was a little while back.

[Animavore]

Hi, and welcome.

but feel that materialism will always be limited in scope in what it can explain,

You mean the material world, the only world, to the best of my knowledge, that there is?

[Rum]

Welcome! Nice to have new members now and again.

[Theophilus]

You mean the material world, the only world, to the best of my knowledge, that there is?

Yes, I mean the material and physical world. That materialistic world not include logic, mathematical axioms, ethics, moral philosophy, notions of beauty and love, art, music, poetry, and everything else you can think about which is not necessarily manifested materially.

[Theophilus]

Welcome! Nice to have new members now and again.

Thankyou. Have you had a few new members in recent days?

[FBM]

Welcome! Nice to have new members now and again.

It's rare, but it happens.

Hi, Theophilus. Come on in and get comfortable.

[FBM]

You mean the material world, the only world, to the best of my knowledge, that there is?

Yes, I mean the material and physical world. That materialistic world not include logic, mathematical axioms, ethics, moral philosophy, notions of beauty and love, art, music, poetry, and everything else you can think about which is not necessarily manifested materially.

Would that not best be defined at the 'phenomenal' world?

[Rum]

Welcome! Nice to have new members now and again.

Thankyou. Have you had a few new members in recent days?

I will have to take a closer look at the data, but I am pretty sure our subscription rate is showing a gentle upward curve.

Encouraging!

[Theophilus]

Would that not best be defined at the 'phenomenal' world?

Hmm. It could be, though perhaps the 'phenomenal world' could be the subjective experience of the 'materialistic world'? I think I would probably want to say that the phenomenal world (as we know it) is within the 'materialistic world' (which includes things we have not yet observed). But the materialistic world is still only a portion of the entire 'creation' if you'll allow me to use that term in the broadest sense.

[Animavore]

Would that not best be defined at the 'phenomenal' world?

Hmm. It could be, though perhaps the 'phenomenal world' could be the subjective experience of the 'materialistic world'? I think I would probably want to say that the phenomenal world (as we know it) is within the 'materialistic world' (which includes things we have not yet observed). But the materialistic world is still only a portion of the entire 'creation' if you'll allow me to use that term in the broadest sense.

What are the other portions? Could you draw a pie-chart highlighting them in proportion to each other?

[Theophilus]

What are the other portions? Could you draw a pie-chart highlighting them in proportion to each other?

I may prefer a Venn diagram so start to look at how these things relate (-:

But I am not sure of the relationships and proportions. The best analogy I can make on that question is if I start to drive from London to Glasgow while you start to drive from Glasgow to London, and then after a while someone asks us to combine our knowledge to draw a map. We have some understanding of both ends, but we're not sure what happens in the middle ("Leeds" is outside of both of our experiences, perhaps thankfully).

As for proportions, I'm not sure how you'd frame that - at first thought is seems like asking which is bigger, the colour red or Wednesdays?

[FBM]

Would that not best be defined at the 'phenomenal' world?

Hmm. It could be, though perhaps the 'phenomenal world' could be the subjective experience of the 'materialistic world'? I think I would probably want to say that the phenomenal world (as we know it) is within the 'materialistic world' (which includes things we have not yet observed). But the materialistic world is still only a portion of the entire 'creation' if you'll allow me to use that term in the broadest sense.

The material world is the world of matter and energy that these bodies are inseparable parts of. The phenomenal world is the world of events, interactions between what appear to be entities within that world. It is the world of experience, the only world we can have knowledge of. The material world is a metaphysical construct used to explain the phenomenal world, the world of experience.

You seem to be asserting the existence of something in addition to the (alleged) material world and the (appearent) phenomenal world. Are you saying that you have knowledge of something beyond the realm of experience? I'm interested in how you managed to get that knowledge, if you don't mind explaining.

[Animavore]

What are the other portions? Could you draw a pie-chart highlighting them in proportion to each other?

I may prefer a Venn diagram so start to look at how these things relate (-:

But I am not sure of the relationships and proportions. The best analogy I can make on that question is if I start to drive from London to Glasgow while you start to drive from Glasgow to London, and then after a while someone asks us to combine our knowledge to draw a map. We have some understanding of both ends, but we're not sure what happens in the middle ("Leeds" is outside of both of our experiences, perhaps thankfully).

As for proportions, I'm not sure how you'd frame that - at first thought is seems like asking which is bigger, the colour red or Wednesdays?

I don't get that analogy. We can always fill in the gaps in the knowledge by actually going to Leeds.
If my question seemed obscure its because I found the original comment about the material world being a part of a larger creation obscure. I was being facetious.

[Theophilus]

You seem to be asserting the existence of something in addition to the (alleged) material world and the (appearent) phenomenal world.

No, having seen your definition of a phenomenal world which encompasses all that we may possibly experience directly or indirectly, I would say that could include all the non-materialistic items I mentioned above (such as logic, maths, beauty, conscience). But I would want to make a clearer distinction then between the material world and your phenomenal world, as I believe your phenomenal world contains non-materialistic elements, elements that we can only ever see a shadow of and are not dependent upon the materialistic world.

Out of interest - do you consider logic and mathematics dependent on a material universe?

[FBM]

...But I would want to make a clearer distinction then between the material world and your phenomenal world, as I believe your phenomenal world contains non-materialistic elements, elements that we can only ever see a shadow of and are not dependent upon the materialistic world.

Fair enough. What are the non-materialistic elements that you believe in, and why do you believe in them?

Out of interest - do you consider logic and mathematics dependent on a material universe?

Sorry, I realize I didn't state my personal position on that. When I said that the material world is the world of matter and energy..., I was just giving a conventional definition. Later, I said, "The material world is a metaphysical construct used to explain the phenomenal world, the world of experience." I'm agnostic about the existence of the material world (neither believe nor disbelieve in it), so there's no way to answer your last question.