Oh, good, someone didn't like me questioning the reality of the first and second dimension under the definitions and rules of materialism and by the recent assertions of atheists in cosmology. They seem to think that those two dimensions, an intrinsic aspect of mathematics and science as done by human beings, are too insignificant to really give materialism, scientism and so the most common form of atheism that is based in materialism and scientism, any real trouble. Apparently, denying anything but a materialist monist universe, using science, and so, also, mathematics, to make their claims, they have some odd belief that mathematics can, nonetheless, be suspended when found inconvenient.
Well, materialism is a monist system, asserting the ultimate reality of only one essential entity, matter-energy, including the forces and laws that govern their interactions in line with causality. I don't want to have to simplify it to the Carl Sagan slogan about The Cosmos again, but under materialism that's all there is, was or will be. Nothing that is not material is to be believed in because it is, by materialist definition, not real.
Unmentioned in that formulation is that what materialists really hold to be the only reality are matter-energy in the only way in which people can talk about those, as they appear to human minds. It is to be held that the images and what we create in our imagination, the only means we have of thinking about things, is to be held as an absolutely objective view of nature. They insist on ignoring that reality out of self-serving convenience. If you don't insist on ignoring that reality, it brings another entity into the mix, consciousness and the various vicissitudes imposed by the actions and the necessities of minds integrating experience. Which, already, is fatally problematic for materialism.
An aspect of that last problem is that the very science materialism relies on for whatever intellectual support it has is intrinsically reliant on mathematics, which is absolutely and inevitably reliant on assertions containing the concepts of the first and second dimensions, as well as other dimensions necessary for matter-energy and the physical forces and laws which are demonstrable only in the context of moving objects. You can't decide that you can dump those parts of mathematics without bringing the entire system into question, certainly as it is applied to an understanding of space and objects in space, of movement and force which is measurable only in space in three dimensions.
Without at least three dimensions objects can't exist and the energy and forces which are the substance of materialist reality can't exist, they couldn't be real. [Note, in a quantum view of the universe time must enter into it. The view of particles as waves requires that there be time for a wave to wave, as one witty scientist once put it.] In a one or two dimension universe, none of those things could exist, in those universes they would be imaginary objects, only, since there is no reason to believe that conscious beings could exist in those universes, there would be no one to imagine them. Well, not unless consciousness and imagination are not material.
They can't have it both ways. They can't assert materialism, no, not even if they rename it "naturalism" or "physicalism" and still have the first and second dimensions being real. Materialism is, mostly, in the business of declaring things to not exist, in general culture that would seem to be the entire purpose of materialism and it is certainly its motive when it invades science. They don't get to draw a line and forbid people from crossing it, banning the raising of these questions merely because they are massively inconvenient and embarrassing to them.
The problems of materialist monism are self-imposed by the radical reduction of what is called real under its rigid ideology. I'm not to blame for a situation they set up and I'm not responsible for the fact that an honest consideration of its implications will often show up fatal problems with it.
If you can tell me what was wrong with my questions or the conclusions I drew about it for atheism, scientism and materialism, I'll listen to it, but I won't stop talking about it in the absence of a successful explanation or refutation.
No comments:
Post a Comment