Ontological Arguments (Humans)

by dhw, Monday, September 27, 2010, 12:22 (5170 days ago) @ xeno6696

MATT: Maybe asking "why materialism was wrong" was the WRONG question. David's arguments about God (as they exist on this forum) was my target, and I fear that the experiential nature of our existence made too easy a fodder for you. 
While I have no technical problem reducing my feelings of love for my wife to a burst of oxytocin in my brain, I fully realize that no language that exists encapsulates the feeling I get.-MATT (to David): He [= dhw] was informing me that experience itself is something that cannot be encapsulated into language!-Um...no...actually I wasn't. The second section of my post is a direct response to your question why materialism is wrong, and that has nothing to do with language. It concerns experiences (like love, creativity, aesthetic appreciation) which we cannot attribute to any known materials. These experiences are a major factor in my own agnosticism, and I can understand why they might tip the balance for a theist, just as materialism tips the balance for an atheist. Of course you and David must sort out the ontological problem between you (good luck to you both!) but ... I hope this isn't too presumptuous of me ... I'd say you were asking the RIGHT question and are now skating away from your real problem, which is your reluctance to abandon materialism. I don't think your love for your wife is due to a burst of oxytocin in your brain, any more than your terror when confronted by a masked gunman is caused by the pounding of your heart. You query your own epistemology, but at the same time you shy away from things you can't study. Why? I would say that is "the deeper question".