The real discussion: Values (Humans)

by romansh , Thursday, December 31, 2015, 17:53 (3248 days ago) @ dhw
edited by romansh, Thursday, December 31, 2015, 18:38

dhw: I don't suppose anyone would dispute the usefulness of scientific research into the material world, 
You would be surprised.
> dhw:but I don't think material “usefulness” is the only value we should be considering. 
I am not sure why the "usefulness"? What is your point? I did not use the word.-Advances and usefulness are not synonymous.
> dhw: Our mysterious consciousness is linked to all kinds of subjective experiences (categories listed above) that are every bit as real and important to us in our daily lives as the material benefits from scientific research.
This is an article of faith of course. 
I might agree we experience consciousness but I am far less convinced of its usefulness than you are. Evolution has endowed us with the capacity to perceive consciousness. Take away the material I am totally dubious of its existence. 
> dhw: The assumption that they are explicable in material terms may be accurate, but I am certainly not prepared to dismiss the hypothesis that there are phenomena beyond the scope of the material world as we know it.
And I am certainly not prepared to dismiss the hypothesis as hogwash.
the claim that there are [may be] phenomena beyond the scope of the material world is of course completely untestable by definition! And how do these immaterial concepts interact with the world. immaterially? Should I take Douglas Adams' concept of hyper-intelligent pandimensional white mice seriously? I would argue about as seriously as cosmic universal intelligences.-> dhw: You constantly talk of assuming and assumptions. I prefer to talk of hypotheses, one of which is David's hypothesis of a universal intelligence directing evolution. 
Frankly I would not count David's universal intelligence as a hypothesis. Avogadro's hypothesis was testable and in fact the BIMP is considering changing the definition of a mole to an Avogadro's Number of entities. 
> dhw: I don't share it, but I don't dismiss it and I don't sneer at it, 
I must admit I can't take David's deeply held position seriously. -> dhw: Re usefulness, the response is the same as above, but I will be more precise: my love for my family and my friends, my delight in a Beethoven symphony, my acute awareness of the beauty and ugliness of the world around me, my fascination with the utter mystery of life and consciousness - these are all immaterial experiences which I share with a lot of other people and which are actually more real to me than quantum phenomena. For many people, God is also real.
I don't see these things as immaterial (in either sense of the word). 
I can ask questions of "your experiences" and your responses are material in both senses of the word. And despite David's (what are for me poorly thought out objections) I could get material responses from various physical aspects of these thoughts and feelings that originate in the brain.-> dhw: “Advances?” “Usefulness”? The subject of this thread is values, and I would suggest that the immaterial values of empathy, tolerance, patience, open-mindedness, and above all love for our fellow creatures are pretty useful,
I notice understanding is not in your list. 
I would argue they are not immaterial ... but very material. You can't bottle these things in a vacuum, despite David's best efforts.-> dhw: and if they were more widely practised our human society would ”advance” beyond all recognition. But if you want to confine the discussion to materialism as the key to knowledge, please explain how chemicals can produce consciousness, love and empathy.
consciousness - illusion
love - oxytocin
empathy - mirror neurons-how? ... evolution-Let me tell you a story ... after my son died eight years ago I experienced intense grief, as one would expect. The thought crossed my mind that evolution had endowed us with the capacity to experience grief. Not for one moment did I doubt that the biochemistry that was raging through my body was somehow immaterial. I decided not to fight evolution and let the "grief" (biochemistry) wash over me or do its thing. As the years passed that particular bit of biochemistry has subsided and is a welcome old friend on the odd day it decides to pay a visit.-Is this an advance? Is it useful? It is totally material.