28 May 15
So here goes my understanding of the concept:
Abstract concepts like numbers, most of mathematics, words, stories etc can be considered both existent and independent of the materials with which they are represented. Thus there are two types of existence: physical existence and abstract existence.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
28 May 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadDo these two types of existence correspond to body/mind (usually stated as mind/body but I am keeping to your ordering) dualism? If so, the "space" of physical existence is physical space and the space of abstract existence is the mind, which is itself abstract.
So here goes my understanding of the concept:
Abstract concepts like numbers, most of mathematics, words, stories etc can be considered both existent and independent of the materials with which they are represented. Thus there are two types of existence: physical existence and abstract existence.
How do they interact? How can one cause effects in the other?
Another point: Recent studies suggest that we make decisions before we know we have made them.
http://exploringthemind.com/the-mind/brain-scans-can-reveal-your-decisions-7-seconds-before-you-decide
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080411/full/news.2008.751.html
It would seem that the brain makes decisions and then the mind learns of it.
28 May 15
Originally posted by JS357Interesting concepts, but no, that is not what I was thinking of. I was not including mind at all at this stage. I am saying that something like 2+2=4 is universally true and may be discovered independently, and was true before ever a human being existed. It is independent of time.
Do these two types of existence correspond to body/mind (usually stated as mind/body but I am keeping to your ordering) dualism? If so, the "space" of physical existence is physical space and the space of abstract existence is the mind, which is itself abstract.
Similarly, the words in this post have meaning that is independent of the various storage mediums that are used between my brain, the computer and eventually all the brains that read my post. The information transmitted surely 'exists', but is not physical.
It would seem that the brain makes decisions and then the mind learns of it.
That is hardly a recent finding, and doesn't really need a 'study'. It is also entirely expected if you actually know much about how the brain works. Although for clarity you should say 'consciousness' not 'mind'. I actually like Sam Harris's discussions of the brain and how the consciousness appears to be in control but isn't.
I do want to get to the brain and how it works, but I wanted to settle the meaning of dualism first. If as you say it is inherently tied to the mind, then maybe my understanding of what dualism means may be wrong.
28 May 15
[i]Originally posted by twhiteheadi]This is the most simplest explanation of dualism and monism.
Does anyone want to discuss dualism? Googlefudge brought it up in another thread and I thought it might make an interesting topic for those interested. If I recall correctly, Robbie likes to bring it up in hist anti-materialist rhetoric but shies away from actual discussions of it.
Dualism means that there is God the Supreme Personality of Godhead who is the cause of all causes and the controller of everything.................but there are also the innumerable spiritual living entities (that's you and me and everyone else) who have minute independence from God and are also fully dependent on God for everything at the same time.
However the monists believe that everything is ONE and that everyone is actually God and that we have just simply forgotten this,........ the Monists say I am God and you are God and your sister is God and everything is God.....etc etc
Monism philosophy is hippy philosophy.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
28 May 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadA quick google on dualism shows it to be commonly approached from the standpoint of mind. But the google definition is "the division of something conceptually into two opposed or contrasted aspects, or the state of being so divided" so it's not necessary to approach it from the standpoint of mind.
Interesting concepts, but no, that is not what I was thinking of. I was not including mind at all at this stage. I am saying that something like 2+2=4 is universally true and may be discovered independently, and was true before ever a human being existed. It is independent of time.
Similarly, the words in this post have meaning that is independent of the ...[text shortened]... is inherently tied to the mind, then maybe my understanding of what dualism means may be wrong.
You seem to be approaching it by identifying the "something" in the definition to be "existence" or existent things, and the duality is abstract vs physical (IIRC usually called concrete). And you also hint at the two aspects having different dependencies on time and on mind.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_and_concrete
I applaud your interest in having an agreed notion of dualism to start with.
28 May 15
Originally posted by divegeesterCome on, educate yourself.
I could google it to inform my thinking but I'd rather read what other posters here think dualism is. I really don't understand the concept to be honest.
If you rely on what others say, you end up arguing their points, which may or may not have anything to do with the topic.
Don't bring a knife to a gunfight. Or, more to the point, don't bring your opponent's gun to a gunfight. Either way, it's usually not the appropriate tool for the job. Do your research.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
28 May 15
Originally posted by SuzianneWell, there's dualism, and then there's duelism. 🙂
Come on, educate yourself.
If you rely on what others say, you end up arguing their points, which may or may not have anything to do with the topic.
Don't bring a knife to a gunfight. Or, more to the point, don't bring your opponent's gun to a gunfight. Either way, it's usually not the appropriate tool for the job. Do your research.
29 May 15
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadnoun
Does anyone want to discuss dualism? Googlefudge brought it up in another thread and I thought it might make an interesting topic for those interested. If I recall correctly, Robbie likes to bring it up in hist anti-materialist rhetoric but shies away from actual discussions of it.
philosophy : the idea or belief that everything has two opposite parts or principles
: the quality or state of having two different or opposite parts or elements
Full Definition
1 : a theory that considers reality to consist of two irreducible elements or modes
2 : the quality or state of being dual or of having a dual nature
3 a : a doctrine that the universe is under the dominion of two opposing principles one of which is good and the other evil
b : a view of human beings as constituted of two irreducible elements (as matter and spirit)
So what are we going to discuss? Whether or not it exists maybe? 😕
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
29 May 15
Originally posted by josephwNo. Here, that's basically about God.
noun
philosophy : the idea or belief that everything has two opposite parts or principles
: the quality or state of having two different or opposite parts or elements
Full Definition
1 : a theory that considers reality to consist of two irreducible elements or modes
2 : the quality or state of being dual or of having a dual nature
3 a : a doctrine that ...[text shortened]... ts (as matter and spirit)
So what are we going to discuss? Whether or not it exists maybe? 😕
29 May 15
Originally posted by JS357Actually I am interested in the philosophical definition. Why would you think it's about God? God is one. Dualism is an idea, a concept, that defines reality as being reducible to opposing forces or elements. Like good and evil, right and wrong, up and down, in and out, and so on and so forth.
No. Here, that's basically about God.
Twhitehead wanted a discussion about dualism, and so I'm trying to contribute to that discussion.
I think it's obvious that dualism is a fact of reality.