Post by johnpenilla on May 8, 2015 17:26:02 GMT
1. Why is understanding physics and the general rules of the universe so important in doing philosophy?
Understanding physics and general rules of the universe are important in doing philosophy because they provide a “truthful” foundation for making philosophical claims about the nature of reality. Using the means of both the latter can foster a comprehensive basis of support for empirical and, albeit, metaphysical claims; in turn, philosophic claims become dependent on physics and rules of the universe to establish validity. The implications of studies in quantum mechanics, for example, establish a radical argument about the empirical. This field is concerned with infinitesimally small aspects of matter, seeking to explain what is happening at this sub- microscopic level. Interpretations of this realm implicate themselves empirically and metaphysically, asserting that the exact state of matter is only conceptually assessable through probability and statistics, for it escapes the five human apertures, along with place and time. Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein’s extensive debate about quantum mechanics highlights the connection of physics to philosophy as both physicists are ultimately crossing into the philosophic realm with their claims. On one hand Bohr asserts that reality is indeterminable, insisting that physics role is to describe reality as it develops with our means of doing so, while Einstein believed staunchly in an objective reality, beyond the human facilities, that can be determined through the applications of physics. Hence he assigned quantum mechanics a temporary means to a greater application, due to its reliance on probability and statistics. This response should illustrate that physics and rules of the universe are desperately important to philosophy because the legitimize claims about reality.
2. What is eliminative materialism? Provide three examples of it.
Eliminative materialism is pervasive process that seeks to explain phenomena through a purely scientific paradigm, which is more precise and correct. The process works by taking any given occurrence and subjecting its explanation methodically to mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, sociology, and if all of the latter do not sufficiently explain the phenomena then it relinquishes the rational to whatever the mystical or “folk psychology” origins it initially entailed. Consecutive examples of this are provided in a three- part film series on the Neuralsufer YouTube channel. In part 2 of the 3 part series, David Lane gives specific examples of the manifestations of eliminative materialism, citing that we use electrical magnetic currents to explain thunder as opposed to Thor; also, we cite bacteria and viruses as the source of disease and not spirits harbored within us; lastly, he elaborates that we have a central nervous system responsible for the movement of our body parts and not spirits deciding our movements. The upshot of this is the reconstruction our cultural outlook by means of language replacement. In Matter vs. Spirit, Lane elaborates that we use eliminative materialism to describe all aspects on nature, with the exception of ourselves, but just as we have eliminated outdated terms to explain phenomena like thunder and disease, we too should eliminate terms like love, motivation and desire for ones that are more representative of what is actually happening in our physiology. Lane takes eliminative materialism one step farther and has argued that the linguistic ineffectiveness produced by using these outdated terms has produced the conflict between science and religion.
Understanding physics and general rules of the universe are important in doing philosophy because they provide a “truthful” foundation for making philosophical claims about the nature of reality. Using the means of both the latter can foster a comprehensive basis of support for empirical and, albeit, metaphysical claims; in turn, philosophic claims become dependent on physics and rules of the universe to establish validity. The implications of studies in quantum mechanics, for example, establish a radical argument about the empirical. This field is concerned with infinitesimally small aspects of matter, seeking to explain what is happening at this sub- microscopic level. Interpretations of this realm implicate themselves empirically and metaphysically, asserting that the exact state of matter is only conceptually assessable through probability and statistics, for it escapes the five human apertures, along with place and time. Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein’s extensive debate about quantum mechanics highlights the connection of physics to philosophy as both physicists are ultimately crossing into the philosophic realm with their claims. On one hand Bohr asserts that reality is indeterminable, insisting that physics role is to describe reality as it develops with our means of doing so, while Einstein believed staunchly in an objective reality, beyond the human facilities, that can be determined through the applications of physics. Hence he assigned quantum mechanics a temporary means to a greater application, due to its reliance on probability and statistics. This response should illustrate that physics and rules of the universe are desperately important to philosophy because the legitimize claims about reality.
2. What is eliminative materialism? Provide three examples of it.
Eliminative materialism is pervasive process that seeks to explain phenomena through a purely scientific paradigm, which is more precise and correct. The process works by taking any given occurrence and subjecting its explanation methodically to mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, sociology, and if all of the latter do not sufficiently explain the phenomena then it relinquishes the rational to whatever the mystical or “folk psychology” origins it initially entailed. Consecutive examples of this are provided in a three- part film series on the Neuralsufer YouTube channel. In part 2 of the 3 part series, David Lane gives specific examples of the manifestations of eliminative materialism, citing that we use electrical magnetic currents to explain thunder as opposed to Thor; also, we cite bacteria and viruses as the source of disease and not spirits harbored within us; lastly, he elaborates that we have a central nervous system responsible for the movement of our body parts and not spirits deciding our movements. The upshot of this is the reconstruction our cultural outlook by means of language replacement. In Matter vs. Spirit, Lane elaborates that we use eliminative materialism to describe all aspects on nature, with the exception of ourselves, but just as we have eliminated outdated terms to explain phenomena like thunder and disease, we too should eliminate terms like love, motivation and desire for ones that are more representative of what is actually happening in our physiology. Lane takes eliminative materialism one step farther and has argued that the linguistic ineffectiveness produced by using these outdated terms has produced the conflict between science and religion.