Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SirTruffleberry t1_j2dpqw8 wrote

Reply to comment by 54yroldHOTMOM in ELI5: How did we realise the mind is in the brain? by theembryo

I don't think it reduces the quality or scope of philosophy if one doesn't assume a soul/immaterial mind.

Assuming unnecessary things to explain phenomena does, on the other hand, usually have negative consequences. Every one of your postulates is like a filter through which the truth must pass. More/stronger filters means it's more likely that the truth snags on one of those assumptions.

5

54yroldHOTMOM t1_j2dvxb3 wrote

What is truth? Are they facts or what someone believes to be true? And what if everything is true? Even the things that “aren’t”. Or if truth is in a state of flux until someone observes it.

0

SirTruffleberry t1_j2dx0ol wrote

I would say that empirical truths (obviously not mathematical or abstract truths) are statements about an efficient model that seems to agree with sensory data and predicts incoming data. That's pretty streamlined but hits the biggest points, I think.

2