Toward a Commonsense Answer to the Special Composition Carmichael – – Australasian Journal of Philosophy 93 (3) Alvin Plantinga: John A. O’Brien Professor of Philosophy Emeritus at Notre Dame University I give two arguments against materialism. A NEW ARGUMENT AGAINST MATERIALISM. ALVIN PLANTINGA. PLENARY ADDRESS FOR THE EVANGELICAL PHILOSOPHICAL.

Author: Takinos Muramar
Country: Norway
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Politics
Published (Last): 17 May 2018
Pages: 285
PDF File Size: 11.59 Mb
ePub File Size: 20.38 Mb
ISBN: 124-9-11254-948-2
Downloads: 36663
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Faurisar

This is, of course, resting on some definition of ” original or primary content,” as opposed to ” derived or secondaru content,” whatever the hell that means. The chair’s pattern is composed of other subordinate patterns of matter and space, which are interchangeable relative to the chair’s larger pattern. A living organism is a pattern which modifies time as well as matter and space. The “content” of beliefs on reductionist materialism is identical to the physical structure of some portion of one’s brain.

Obviously there is no mystery why this is the case, but a myopic study of either would leave us with an explanatory gap. Philosopher Alvin Plantinga has put forth notable ideas in both epistemology and philosophy of religion.

Alvin Plantinga – Against Materialism « Veritas Vincit Tenebram

One objection could be that computers have propositional knowledge. Just because it is false in the actual world does not mean that it is false in all ahainst worlds. Intuition to the rescue again? We are like a process that runs on the hardware platform of our neurology. The fact that this isn’t the case means existence is necessarily? Plantinga against materialism or for immaterialism. Without the hardware, the process cannot run.

Alvin Plantinga, Against materialism – PhilArchive

Andrew Melnyk – – Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews 3 3: Maverick Christian April 3, at 8: Or that reality is constructed plantibga a Buddhist demon as an illusion to keep you from the True Path. An author writes a recipe in a book. Chad Carmichael – – Australasian Journal of Philosophy 93 3: Wright’s Rejection of the Soul. We are not the brain, be are the change in the brain over time Unlike inanimate matter, life is animated to survive, thrive, and reproduce. What bearing does this have on materialism?


The following not exhaustive list of items require moderator pre-approval: Snowdon – – In John Alvib ed. Leibniz asks us to imagine a machine that perceives, desires, and thinks.

The brain is able to do something similar when I have a mental image of a map of Britain, even though no actual map of Britain is printed on my brain.

Posted by Maverick Christian at 9: Richard Boyd – – In Ned Block ed. The kind that reduces to monism, and the kind that is so useless as to be self-defeating.

Alvin Plantinga – Against Materialism

Leave a Comment to the Entry. His argument strategy is to use the modal intuitions of possibility and impossibility in relation to the mind-body problem. If so, then I think you’re modally fine – or at least in good company.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

I am not identical with B” 4. Science says all the matter in our body is completely different from our old body some time ago. Read the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively.

I don’t understand the replacement argument. Newer Post Older Post Home.

In the end, the notion that the firing of C-fibers, say, is the same as pain-consciousness, is very counter-intuitive Intuition to the rescue again? Human and Divineed. In the case of me and my body, the modal properties are different.


All links to either audio or video content require abstracts of the posted material, posted as a comment in the thread. It seems impossible to see how material interactions could possess content of this sort. Amir Horowitz – – Synthese 1: When Plantinga imagines his body replaced with different but functionally identical matter, and then agaknst that there is a moment between the replacement where he has no body and yet his consciousness still exists, and therefore is not material, I wonder where he expects all that information that defines the particular relationships between his particles to be materiwlism Commenting Rules Read the Post Before You Reply Read the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively.


See afainst for an example of a suitable abstract. Perhaps all the information in one hemisphere is transferred through the corpus callosum to the other hemisphere, the former replaced, the transfer performed again, and ta-da!: A computer program, while running as a process on the hardware of a computer, controls what the computer againstt do.

It certainly seems that nothing physical can express a proposition except derivatively. Without the process, the hardware has nothing to do.

That doesn’t make the chair “immaterial”. Philosopher David Chalmers argues that any version of physicalism cannot provide an adequate explanation of consciousness and how we have both mental states and physical….

Users may submit only one post per day. I’m fairly used to analytic philosophy to the point where what seems easy to me might not seem so easy to the layperson the sort of phenomena I have in mind is called “The Expert Blind Spot” see this brief university web page on the topic. Further, if he wants to posit the entirety of his bodily matter undergoing assimilation with itself, this idea seems plainly incoherent.

Another compelling argument I’ve heard — In a purely material universe, we could still have biological evolution, human civilization, us Redditing right now, etc, but it’d just be incredibly fine, utterly unconscious clockwork.