/lit/ - Literature

>>21867047
>Where does he address the (very common) claim that reality is simply the sum total of everything that materially exists, and that human perception is simply an object of reality and not a necessary component of its structure?
Human perception is SUBJECTIVE first of all. That should be first clue that it is not just some material OBJECT, as Schrödinger knew by the way. It's right in the name. Consciousness is not in spacetime, it's the other way around. Spacetime is in mind/s. A thought has no position or momentum. Spacetime, in fact, is part of the experiencial data stream which is emergent in MINDS.

>>21843271
What would be the reason for not believing that there is a free decision process between available options, exactly as the observer experiences? Can you give an account of how the observer is forced to make decisions without pre-supposing or begging the question with regard to a physicalist theory of mind being true? No, you can't do this in any sort of empirically testable way, and you never will be able to, as swinburne points out here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCKlU7I0sDI
So there is no need for coping since your assertions against free will are nothing more than baseless conjectures that can be disregarded. And in before some appeal to the idea that there are only two kinds of possible causations, both of which are supposed possible materialist event causations, one being a supposed deterministic variant, and one a indeterministic one. The assertion is that there is AGENT determination as a variable and as as an input device into the unfolding of events in the physical world events. And so the idea is specifically NOT that the matter must be contingent upon the goings on of supposed material causation. This in NOT to say that decisions are not constrained/effected by the unfolding of uncontrollable events in the physical world, of course they are, including uncontrollable physiological events, ie, the observer can not control whether or not he gets hungry, but the observer CAN control whether or not he wants to break fast, provided there is available food.

>>21725726
I should say also, with regard to physicalist accounts of mentation, an even HARDER problem with and even WIDER explanatory gap for physicalist accounts of consciousness, that of explaining how particles, or excitations in 'fields', or wave functions, or (insert the explanation of what mater even is), how any of these things give rise to the EXPERIENCER in the first place who EXPERIENCES the mentation. There's so many presuppositions involved in this ideology it crazy. I have always been amazed at this movement. Most of them ALSO deny free will while at the same time appealing to the idea that people should CHOOSE not to have kids.

>>21364005
It would have been possible for physicality, ie the universe, to not have existed. The universe is contingent and the all mind could have chosen not to boot it up. The all mind, god, whatever it prefers to be called, could not have not existed. This is the necessary entity. The thing which ends the infinite regress of contingent beings. Anything physical is derivative and not fundamental. Anything physical began. Physical things emerge in minds, just as the objects we call physical emerge in minds. And ultimately, the whole of physicality, the universe, is nested in the god mind. The part of us that is not emergent and is not a physical object, is our mind/soul. This is why every physical thing can be observed objectively but subjective experience is by definition not objectively observable. It is however constrained by physicality in some ways during a particular experience packet associated with a particular avatar. These physical constraints are lifted at 'death'. Then you log off in terms of interfacing with a particular experiential data stream associated with a particular physical avatar body.

>>19459027
Here is another

>>16398510

>>15813258
>What makes you think awareness doesn't spring into existence through the composition of my organism?
Because I didn't experience my own awareness springing into existence from nothing, Because there is pretty abundant evidence from experimentally valid parapsychology research which has indicated that consciousness is non-physical, because of some of the implications of the hard problem of conciousness and because of the von Neumann–Wigner interpretation of wave function collapse.

>>15648339
Yes, certain experiences are subjective, when they shouldn't be in the first place. The answer is consciousness.