14
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by QueenHawlSera@sh.itjust.works to c/askscience@lemmy.world

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's funny how people told me I had said something misleading and couldn't point to what it was, and now you're claiming I refused to listen and can't point to anything I refused to listen to. Somehow, people keep assigning blame to me without being able to substantiate it in any way.

I don’t think you’re seeking information, I think you’re seeking argument.

I presented a rather thoughtful line of philosophical reasoning, and expected people to either agree with it or critique it. As one does.

Instead, people started critiquing an idea utterly unrelated to anything I said. Which you are now blaming me for. And now you're saying that I just came here "seeking argument," really? Did you read my initial comment? Do you really, genuinely believe that I was trolling and not looking for an intellectual discussion?

why would you pick OBJECTION! as your username?

Quite simply, because I find that people say things all the time without providing any sort of evidence, and I believe in calling that out and keeping things more evidence focused.

Whatever problems I might have with people being unable to substantiate or defend their beliefs with evidence, I have much more disdain for people throwing around accusations without evidence. Which people on here do, all the time, constantly.

If you want to say I'm "argumentative," that's fine with me. There's nothing wrong with arguments. What's more wrong is to talk shit about people without being able to substantiate it. Lots of people, not just on here, but on the internet in general, will make up bullshit about a person or group they don't like, and if you call out their bullshit, they use that against you too. "Crybullying" is the term I use for it.

I think everyone ought to have the chance to defend themselves and nobody should be going around talking shit if they can't back it up. I won't claim to be perfect, but if you don't go around saying things you can't back up, then you will find me much easier to get along with.

[-] davidagain@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

You appear to be attempting to prove to the world that I'm wrong to assert that you and the other user unnecessarily blow out of proportion and prolong arguments without truly listening, by strongly emotive argument and taking what I said as a series of unconnected assertions for to destroy, taking on board nothing of what I said and instead turning my reluctance to join in your preexisting arguments into some sort of proof that my conclusions are wrong.

You seem to be unable to see the wood for the trees. The irony is strong.

Did it not occur to you that arguing so strongly that I'm wrong, accompanied by name-calling no less, might instead show that I'm right? It wasn't meant as a trap, but you twisted it around until you ensnared yourself.

Ask yourself if you really do demand as much evidence from people or points with which you instinctively agree, and you'll see that your self-perceived intellectual integrity of believing only what people can prove to you is merely double standards and a sham: I accused you of being innecessarily argumentative and you shouted that I had provided no evidence!!!

This is one of your favourite forms of disagreement, I suspect because it makes you feel you have logic on your side, but the asymmetry in the demand for proof is bias, and concluding that people who you disagree with are wrong because they failed in your one-person prosecution, judge & jury court is naive.

Your court was not constituted to discover truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. You should be surprised every time it finds it.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

and if you call out their bullshit, they use that against you too.

I accused you of being innecessarily argumentative and you shouted that I had provided no evidence!!!

Oh hey, look, I called it.

What I actually said, by the way, was that I don't mind if you call me argumentative. The thing that you don't have evidence for is when you assigned fault to me in my conversation with the other person.

This is such typical crybully behavior. Talks mad shit, can't back up anything, and then whines about it. What do you imagine you're accomplishing here?

You came in here just to talk shit. Literally, you saw two people you didn't like in an argument and you loved it, because it gave you the opportunity to gloat and act all self-righteous.

You don't even recognize your own behavior when I specifically call it out. I don't know what I'm supposed to do with that. Are you even aware of what you're doing, or is it just second-nature?

Literally what would I have to say to make you happy? You want me to just take all the blame and prostrate myself before your superiority, and anything short of that, any attempt to stand up for myself, or to explain my actions, is just further proof of my wrongdoing to you. This is exactly why I picked the name I did, because I completely reject your whole way of doing things and of approaching conflict.

this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2025
14 points (85.0% liked)

Ask Science

14303 readers
1 users here now

Ask a science question, get a science answer.


Community Rules


Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.


Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.


Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.


Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.


Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.


Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.


Rule 7: Report violations.Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.


Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.


Rule 9: Source required for answers.Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.


By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.

We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS