thesis: the soul is real, because: a) Only an immaterial soul can think immaterial and spiritual mathematical concepts that are not affected by the 4 forces of nature.
b) The hypothesis postulates the existence of the soul is analogous to the hypothesis that postulates the existence of the graviton for the gravitational field, since the soul, like the graviton, has not been verified empirically, but does not mean that the hypothesis of the soul is pseudoscience, nor is the assumption of the gravitons.
c) That we can not know the mechanism that enables the soul to think of ideas does not mean that the soul does not exist because, after all, not completely know the mechanism that allows gravity, but that does not deny gravity.
d) material postulate that the ideas do not really exist are inconsequential, since the true materialist believes that everything is matter, and would have to believe that ideas are contingent realities, but as they accept this, then it contradicts materialist himself and that is an argument for the soul.
Review:
1-Biopsychology teaches us that there is an immaterial soul that thinks ideas but brain material from humans, then the theory of pseudo-soul is a non-scientific answer does not mean anything. On the other hand, social psychology teaches us that the minds of children is a tabula rasa (as argued by Locke) that takes the ideas in a social context that challenges the Cartesian view of "innate ideas" of the soul in which cogitative more than some outdated metaphysics still believes.
2-to explain why the concepts are not directly affected by the 4 interaction is neither necessary nor scientific postulate that quotas are immaterial entities designed by a metaphysical soul, and that's enough to know that these concepts do not exist as such, because only contextually there by decree of the ideantes: for example, the concept of "Superman" does not exist in the context of reality, it is not material (objective reality = matter) but "there" in the context of science fiction simply because it has been postulated arbitrarily. And as the concepts, unlike the 4 forces do not exist in the context of material reality is obvious they can not be directly affected by the objective forces and materials, and what does not exist can not be affected by what we do exists (which only affects things that coexist with it.) Now, as our brains do exist and prefrontal cortices real, material and objective, ergo if they are affected by 4 forces and whether they experienced a drastic change that would involve the collapse of the universe and the consequent destruction of the brains of humans, then there would be no concepts in the absence of brains that think, that is, the concepts would be affected indirectly by 4 forces disorder to affect these directly to cerebros.De It follows that the thesis unscientific Paco's soul is more and materialism simply fictions M. Bunge to explain the concepts.
3-I do not think that the hypothesis soul is analogous to the graviton, and that while the gravitons are just a guess, is no less true that the theory postulates that adheres to the scientific method and makes predictions that can be verified empirically. Unlike the case of the entity "soul", which is, by definition, unverifiable and undetectable, and the hypothesis that posits no mechanism does not explain or predict anything, therefore, is not pure science, but there is no analogy pseudociencia.Luego the metaphysical hypothesis of the soul and scientific conjecture gravitons. 4-
While we do not know fully the mechanism of the gravitational field, we know enough about it in the light of the geometric theory of Einstein gravity and quantum theory, we can not say anything about the entelechy "soul" on which science knows nothing because, by definition, unverifiable and undetectable the alleged "soul." Paco is also mistaken in the analogy, since it can, behind the science claim unintelligible metaphysical entities to explain the mechanism of generation of ideas when it is already known by the neurosciences, because the concepts are fictions generated by brain processes or "PSICON" which are plastic nervous systems, where connectivity varies over time, and need not complicate things by postulating a "dualism" brain-soul which, among other things, violates the energy conservation pincipio.
5-With regard to materialism, we might say that there is "a" material but "many" as evidenced by the colorful materialism of Holbach, Diderot, Feuerbach, Vogt, Buchner, Marx, Haeckel, Loeb, Le Dantec, Bunge, Well, Ferrater Mora, JJCSmart, Churchland, etc.Luego not know very well that Paco materialism cover when pontificating that materialism "must" believe that ideas are realities contingentes.Si paco referred in particular to the materialism of Gustavo Bueno, he tells us that the concepts are real and exist, but are not limited to signs that represent (m1), nor the thoughts (m2), but are part of a third type of material (m3), ie, concepts are material entities resulting from the dialectical epistemological m1 and m2, but irreducible to m1 and m2, as the mathematical relationships are the result of carrying out operations (m2) with physicalist terms (m1), and that means that these concepts or relationships fall from a starry sky nor are generated by an immaterial soul, because for Well it comes down to matter (m1, m2 or m3) in the field of special ontology and the idea of \u200b\u200bthe soul is pure metaphysics and extrapolate the result of false contents of this world hypostatize taking them beyond all possible return to the world of phenomena. That is, we can not make a regressus of the concepts of the soul, since we can not start from the soul progressus relations from the hyper terciogenéricas.Luego Well materialist is not necessary the idea of \u200b\u200bthe soul and, therefore, Paco objection is worthless because it does not help to bolster his thesis about the existence of the soul.
0 comments:
Post a Comment