User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 24

  1. #1
    Member Skip Foreplay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    MBTI
    ENxP
    Socionics
    ENFp
    Posts
    35

    Default Animistic vs Naturalistic Explanation

    Some people say that they learned everything they needed to know in Kindergarten. I for one am glad that I entered first grade and continued from there. The subject matter changed a little bit, but I was able to adapt. For instance, one thing I didn’t learn in Kindergarten was that an ultimate explanation of the universe in animistic terms is indefensible. Of course, it would have been nice to have learned that in kindergarten because I wound up wasting a lot of time wondering about that problem. To explain the universe away with animism is generally problematic – more problematic than opting not to give an explanation, at least. That’s probably the reason that I approached the problem for the wrong angle. It’s not easy to clear up circularity, contradiction and infinite regress in animistic explanations, but instead of attempting that highly implausible feat, it would have been better to ask just why the problem seems so impossible to solve.
    That the universe, no matter how it came about, can only be explained in naturalistic terms, is a game-changing conclusion. If two people argue about ultimate explanations before both have accepted this conclusion, their discourse will never be raised to the level at which it should begin. It seems like referring to a person as a naturalist has pejorative undertones most of the time. It’s similar to being called a reductionist, which is a term that should probably only refer to the analysis of basic, physical processes to explain phenomena, but is instead often used to imply some systematic obscuration of the issue. There are basic processes that underlie every phenomenon, and that’s a fact about our world. All of these phenomena occur in nature – that’s another fact. Even a chaotic world separate from our own would have naturalistic explanations in terms of chaos, and that would really be no different as far as the legitimacy of naturalistic explanation is concerned. So using the term ‘naturalist’ with a pejorative bent may really only refer to the disagreeable temperament of the naturalist.
    Physical explanation is different from formal explanation in that it is a system of tiers that become more general as one moves up. Science is the perfect example of this. A scientist studies very specific phenomena to arrive at general rules through experimental replication. As a result, phenomenal explanation becomes general. The general explanations are then treated as basic assumptions, for in a sense they are basic, and the process is repeated. This leads to an umbrella effect, with each explanation encompassing more phenomena than the last.
    Somewhere along the line, it may be necessary to introduce an animistic explanation. I honestly
    Don’t foresee this happening until we have the grasp of Mind that could explain away solipsism and the like, and I do not foresee this happening any time soon. Nevertheless, it may come to that point. If it does go there, it will not end there. A creator would have to be subject to the laws of nature. That is, the laws of nature could not come about from his will alone. Having such a will presupposes the natural, rather than animistic origin of its existence, because one could not will himself such power without such a powerful will.

    Does that sound about right to you?

    -Lance

  2. #2
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Yeah, animism makes no sense. Naturalism (even reductionism) is the way to go.

    Animism is just projection.

  3. #3
    Post Human Post Qlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,488

    Default

    I'm not going to claim to take either side, because I 'animism' (it's not the best word, but I'm not going to look for a better one) and 'naturalism' (?) are apples and oranges, or maybe more like grapes and ballbearings. Naturalistic explanations exist to explain how things happen, and certain types of truths. Animistic explanations fall in the types of explanations meant to relate what happens to our psyche. When they come in conflict with each other is when either are going beyond their reach.

  4. #4
    Member Skip Foreplay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    MBTI
    ENxP
    Socionics
    ENFp
    Posts
    35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qlip View Post
    I'm not going to claim to take either side, because I 'animism' (it's not the best word, but I'm not going to look for a better one) and 'naturalism' (?) are apples and oranges, or maybe more like grapes and ballbearings. Naturalistic explanations exist to explain how things happen, and certain types of truths. Animistic explanations fall in the types of explanations meant to relate what happens to our psyche. When they come in conflict with each other is when either are going beyond their reach.
    This is not strictly correct. Animism in indeed the proper word to use, and it is in conflict with naturalism because its definition is not restricted to "explanations meant to relate what happens to our psyche," but refers more broadly to phenomena whose causes are psychic.

    -Lance

  5. #5
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    A problem is too much naturalism could lead to this:



    Tho she is sexy, the devaluement of human life is a logical consequence of technological advancement and if you do not believe in a religious concept of a soul and the concept "of it should be left untouched", you'ld have to find new ways. I think the latter one in the last sentence is good but the former one needs to be reformed.

    A new moral and with that valuement of human life will be necessary for the next century.
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  6. #6
    Post Human Post Qlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skip Foreplay View Post
    This is not strictly correct. Animism in indeed the proper word to use, and it is in conflict with naturalism because its definition is not restricted to "explanations meant to relate what happens to our psyche," but refers more broadly to phenomena whose causes are psychic.

    -Lance
    Causes that are explained as psychic are meant to relate to our psyche. Animism is also a definition for the belief that inanimate object have some kind of spirit, BTW. To me, putting those two against each other makes me judge based on my priorities. I honestly believe that Animism, even though it does outstep its bounds in truth finding (I agree) has greater capability of getting people to a place where the most amount of people can be happy in their lives. Natrualism is a tool without a wielder, and hasn't proven to me capable of making our lives any better on its own.

  7. #7
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    So when you give your vibrator a name thats soulifieing an intimate object ?
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  8. #8
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,633

    Default

    Wasted a lot of time in kindergarden? Seriously? No one else things that sentence holds the key to the entire post? Or even the posters personality?

  9. #9
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Wasted a lot of time in kindergarden? Seriously? No one else things that sentence holds the key to the entire post? Or even the posters personality?
    what a silly thing to say. an ad hominem attack and a strawman at the same time.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    what a silly thing to say. an ad hominem attack and a strawman at the same time.
    Read it that way if you like, its not what I had intended.

Similar Threads

  1. Naturalist Vs Creationist
    By Saslou in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 08-23-2011, 03:18 PM
  2. Explanation for SJs dislike of change [Si vs Ne/Ni/Se]
    By Snow Turtle in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-23-2008, 06:37 AM
  3. MBTI vs the MBTI Step II test
    By Totenkindly in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-31-2008, 09:25 PM
  4. Does SJ vs SP account for gender bias?
    By Tayshaun in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-17-2007, 08:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO