Idealism is when you think that the world is determined by ideas, materialism is when you think that the world is determined by material. Facts don't care about your feelings! :gun-shapiro:
Idealism is when you think that the world is determined by ideas, materialism is when you think that the world is determined by material. Facts don't care about your feelings! :gun-shapiro:
deleted by creator
Sounds a lot like panpsychism, which is kinda ill-defined itself because the word could mean a lot of things but I'd categorize most formulations of it as a form of physicalism and by extend it suffers from the same problem described in the article.
deleted by creator
Not sure I understand completely, does that mean a hylopsychist is essentially agnostic about how consciousness and matter relate to each other?
deleted by creator
Sounds like we might be on the same page actually, what are your views on how your personal consciousness relates to the world? Does your personal consciousness have causal efficacy in of itself or are its contents entirely dependent on the external world, however you define such an external world?
deleted by creator
Thanks for the answer but I still don't feel as if its a proper response to the article.
What you're talking about still suffers from the combination problem (https://philpapers.org/browse/the-combination-problem-for-panpsychism) and it doesn't at all explain why our conscious experience is exactly as it is given what we know about evolution.
If all our conscious experience is derived from the material world it doesn't really make sense for us evolutionarily speaking to experience pain when somebody stabs us or pleasure when we orgasm, it seems as if the contents of our experience could very well be reverse in those cases and our bodies would still react the same as before. In a way it also feels like a fine-tuning problem.
Why not just give consciousness in of itself causal efficacy and rid yourself of these kinds of problems?