On the Ideas of Quine: Section 2

Willard Quine talks about his contributions to philosophy, hosted by Bryan Magee.

Section 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iZvycU3I9w

Section 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ3E9uAqVFQ

Section 3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qchG8wh7mgY

Section 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3kL92aZmpg

Section 5:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJlSdCzFtgM

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Bryan
• Magee
• Willard
• Quine
• Science
• Philosophy
• Logic
• Logical
• Positivism

[LooksAeterna]

(contd.) Note 8:23 - 8:31 !

He admits that his physicalism does not arise from a philosophical truth search and a rational elimination of idealism, but simply from laziness and problem avoidance: materialism avoids 1. having to solve the mind body problem and 2. to face the dangers of the soteriological complexities involved in idealist solutions. Also it allows you to rub shoulders with the success wave of science and you still get a considerable income at a university and as an author.

[LooksAeterna]

@rbh104 No Magee simply participates in the conspiratorial rhetoric of the corporate establishment to simply ignore and not even seriously discuss the idealist solution to the mind body problem and present the exorcism of dualism to make the otherwise obviously nonsensical materialist solution more plaubsible.

"nearly everyone I know today sees Quine's explanation on the whole as the most common sense option"

You are surrounded by pretty backward people then, no offense :))

[German1184]

"And we all are prepared to recognize that the will is caused when we try to train children in such a way to influence their behavior… All these are cases of causing people to will; but their freedom of the will remains, insofar as their activity is the result of causal chain… one link of which is the willing.” -- W. V. O. Quine

[German1184]

“The will is free in the sense that people, very often, do what they will to do. They are free, within limits… of their strength or talent, to do things they will to do. The freedom of will does not mean that the will is free to will as it will, that would be nonsense. And doesn’t mean that the will is uncaused; the will is caused." -- W. V. O. Quine

[LooksAeterna]

@TheDavid2222 The soteriological complexities of idealism are obviously avoided through the belief in materialism since the naive hope of the materialist religion is that salvation - that is the absolute cessation of all problems - is the automatic outcome of death: non-existence, regardless of how you lived. The simplicity and ease with which materialists hope to end all problems is, IMO, the main reason they favor this otherwise nonsensical belief.

[TheDavid2222]

I do not approve of Quine's position on free will. Immanuel Kant is one of my philosophical hero's and I think his Critique of Pure Reason is more on track with what we can know.

[TheDavid2222]

@LooksAeterna what do you mean by "soteriological complexities"? I quickly looked up the term "soteriology" and found it to mean the study of the religious doctrines of salvation. I don't understand what you mean here. Please explain how "soteriological complexities" fit into this discussion.

[TheDavid2222]

My emotions tell me that materialism is incorrect. I don't know how Idealists respond to materialism, but I truly hope that they respond with fervor.

[LooksAeterna]

@TheRedHutt "You believe that nothing exists mind-independently"

I said that about abstractions like "atoms" and so forth, I do not see how you catch "everything" in that. The idea of totality is BTW best with serious problems (see Grim's "The Incomplete Universe").

I am not using ANY metaphysical theory of the mind, nor do I even claim that "a mind" exists. So your whole rhetoric is empty. But any reasonable person admits that abstractions exist only in (whatever) the mind (is).

[LooksAeterna]

@TheRedHutt (contd.)

"straw-man materialists"

It is Dennet with whom Quine concurred (in another video) that behind his (admitted) physicalism is really a materialist stance (which is quite religiously nonsensical). Also, apprently you have already forgotten the line of discussion in which my mention of materialism occured. So there is no way it was a straw man argument.

"Your "hard problem of mind" is a non-problem"

Yes, but only for idealists - which is forbidden secret.

[TheRedHutt]

@LooksAeterna You believe that nothing exists mind-independently; this straightforwardly puts the"mind" (a flimsy folk concept) beyond possible explanation. Idealists say that nothing exists outside the mind, but the mistake is assuming that minds exist and are metaphysically distinct from non-minds. When you get past this folk assumption, a mind-based ontology is useless. All your talk of the mind is based on folk psychology, which has been shown to be incoherent by Kripke and Wittgenstein.

[LooksAeterna]

@TheRedHutt "Your lack of education on the subject comes through in every comment"

Funny, if that were so, you might have succeded in proving how it did so in a single instance. Yet your rhetoric has been empty all this time.

"nonsense talk about dead and live matter (and you still have not explained what this is supposed to mean)"

I have even repeated it. Dyslexia ? The assmuptions about the deadness of matter, BTW, are what distinguishes a materialist (religionist) from a mere physicalist.