Physicalism or materialism. The idea that everything there is arises from physical matter. If true would mean there is no God or Free Will, no immortal soul either.
Seems to be what most of academia bases their world view on and the frame work in which most Science is done.
Often challenged by Dualism and Idealism but only by a loud fringe minority.
I’ve heard pan-psychicism is proving quite the challenge, but I hear that from people who believe crystals can cure autism
I hear that “Oh actually the science is moving away from materialism” as well, but that seems to be more crystal talk as well.
So lemme ask science instead of google.
Any reason to doubt physicalism? Is there anything in science that says “Huh well that seems to not have any basis in the physical at all and yet it exists”
Edit: I have heard of the Essentia Foundation and Bernado Kastrup but since it’s endorsed by Deepak Chopra I’m not sure I can trust it
But we cannot believe anything without evidence
You can believe without evidence, belief is an internal process, that can be justified by evidences (that are external) or by other internal processes.
You can have a religion, spiritual beliefs and etc. If that’s make you comfortable and integrates you in a commununity, great! Even better if your community helps outsiders.
What you should not do is expect others to held your beliefs without evidence, or impose into others views that can not be validated by evidence.
Plenty of people do. Whether they should or shouldn’t and whether they should claim it’s objectively real is different. But plenty of people believe in those things without proof.
You spend all day believing things without evidence otherwise you would not be able to go about your daily life. The demand for evidence comes after disbelief or sketpicism and not before it.
No I don’t, for example, I don’t need evidence that my car works, because it just does.
If I interacted with ghosts regularly, then I’d already have proof that materialism doesn’t exist.
If we did not regularly and readily believe things without evidence, we would not ever find ourselves incorrect, but we do, and many times in total. (If you believe yourself never incorrect you are very foolish and charlatans will have a field day with you.)
You are lying to yourself if you think that you do not take your daily life on trust and experience, not evidence. We are the product of evolution and usually spot patterns quickly rather than gather evidence and consider carefully. We make snap decisions all day every day on scant or no evidence. We would be paralysed by indecision if not. This is not wrong, it’s not bad, it’s just quick and necessary.
Your faith in your car is a case in point. You trust that it will work. You don’t think to question it, because you’re familiar with it. You similarly trust, without evidence, the vehicles of your friends and family and of taxi drivers, and any number of buses or trains that you use every day, but as soon as I’m selling you a car, you want proof, and expect documentation, full service history, government checks of whether the vehicle has been written off or stolen (if your country or state provides such things), test drives and warranties. The stakes are higher so you require evidence. You do no such thing before boarding a bus or taxi.
No, we reserve the demand for evidence for things about which we are already skeptical, or things that we doubt, or where we are unsure and feel we don’t know. Not for the rest. Not at all. We just assume our conclusions based on hunches and experience. No one lives their daily normal life as a skeptic about everything they believe, and you would stand out as a very, very strange indeed if you did.
Your evidence is massively, powerfully and overwhelmingly outweighed by your beliefs. Even your beliefs about science are formed through social relationships and third hand “evidence” at best. This is not because you are foolish and credulous, but because you are sensible and pragmatic, and because you are primarily a functioning human animal for more hours a day than you are a lab-closeted scientist or logic-bound philosopher.
Again, the demand for evidence comes after disbelief, sketpicism, doubt or indecision, and not before it.
But neither can you discredit anything without evidence. The basis of science is falsifiability. That is, we have to be able to prove it wrong.
Hitchen’s Razor says otherwise.