IAI_Admin OP t1_j71q151 wrote
Abstract: Is the mind just a part of the world? Or is the world all in the mind? Neither, argues philosopher, physcian and poet Raymond Tallis as he puts forward his take onhow we make sense of experience. When neuroscience and Darwinism trespass into the humanities, they become, he says, "neuromania" and"Darwinitis" – unhealthy, mad and malign.
70Ytterbium t1_j720lzm wrote
Ah yeah, the dreadful Neuromania and Darwinitis. Keep safe kids!
woShame12 t1_j727bsz wrote
There's an external world that we experience with our brains. A brain that is unique to each person, but approximates the world relatively similarly. Oh no, am I a neuromaniac?
noonemustknowmysecre t1_j732v5u wrote
Religious anti-science in sheep's clothing.
When philosophers, humanities, religion, or witch doctor step into the realm of science they're usually pushing some malignant agenda to the detriment of all. Science provides you the truth, as best we can, in the least wrong way possible. It's the witchdoctos and preachers and humanitarians' job to accept that and keep all the guys from trying to cannibalize each other with that knowledge or whatever. If they reject the science, I assume they're just sharpening their own cannibal fork.
captain_brunch_ t1_j73fj1d wrote
> When philosophers, humanities, religion, or witch doctor step into the realm of science
Uhh you know that the scientific method came from philosophy right?
ValyrianJedi t1_j733lbt wrote
The world is pretty unequivocally not all in the mind. Arguments like that seek to make up a majority of the reason a lot of people look down on philosophy
MyPhillyAccent t1_j81cwfs wrote
> The world is pretty unequivocally not all in the mind.
Not looking to argue.
Read some Kastrup. Catch up on science. ie. non-local universe Nobel Price.
ValyrianJedi t1_j82jwg1 wrote
I think you're misunderstanding what non-locally real means
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments