Materialism, Idealism or neuanced hybrid?
Just looking for guidance on this fundamental, perennial philosophical question. I'm inclined towards some type of idealism. As sound as material/physicalism appears, quantum physics and consciousness, to name a few, seem to challenge this well established paradigm. To be clear, I'm no fan of deepak chopra or any other proponent "woo woo" physics. I'd would love to here your thoughts on this be they negative, positive or obnoxious. All is revealing and conducive to my quest. Thank you
0
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
4 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.The philosophy of Nagarjuna recognises both in a system called Two Truths. These two truths are Relative Truth and Absolute Truth . Relative Truth is the day to day objective truth in the material world. Absolute Truth is the truth which is undiscovered
Geoffrey51
Level 8
July 7, 2018
0
Materialism and Idealism are two different views of man's relationship with the world.
The materialist says the facts we find in the world are in the world and the Idealist points out that materialist conclusion is a conclusion it must be thought, the is no unthought experience
My guess is that Materialism/Idealism is a false dichotomy.
cava
Level 7
July 5, 2018
2
Physics is a science...not a bullshit macguffen to be pulled out whenever you don't get something. TY from a physicist.
MissaDixon
Level 7
July 4, 2018
0
@DZhukovin 2%...interesting... cause the last time I checked, you can't do much of anything without it.
One fundamental philosophical question being repeated around parts of the world is:
'Will there be enough food for myself and my family?'.
Ellatynemouth
Level 8
July 4, 2018
0
You see my point?
Whilst there are those asking 'fundamental philosophical questions' there are others in the world who are struggling to simply survive so as to be lucky to get to that same level.
I see privilege and indifference rearing its ugly head. I agree with Marx - the point, however, is to change it.
I would say a political solution is necessary to address hunger, not a philosophical one.
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
As an aside. All the civilised aspects of British society which are defined by the legacy of Democratic Socialism (such as the NHS and the Welfare State) were the result of grass roots political campaigning. Philosophers were not part of that.
I get your point, but I can walk and chew gum. When I'm not volunteering full time for a local charity providing thoes exact needs, I must confess. I do indulge in metaphysical, philosophical thought. Is this problematic? I don't want to be argumentative, but what would you prefer I think about?
@Ellatynemouth Again I agree totally. Its like our friend Maslow indicates. Get the fundamentals sorted first. Hungry people don't give a jot who can provide the best rhetoric for their Q&As. They need food. Philosophy is a great game to play if you are a comfortable Westerner with a myriad of 1st world problems like "They didn't have any damn Parmesan in the shop today" or " I can't find my Louis V bag and I'm meeting Sandra in ten minutes" In real life, disastrous problems require political solutions and action, not weeks and years of pondering!
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.