• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Animistic vs Naturalistic Explanation

Skip Foreplay

New member
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
35
MBTI Type
ENxP
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
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Yeah, animism makes no sense. Naturalism (even reductionism) is the way to go.

Animism is just projection.
 

Qlip

Post Human Post
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
8,464
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
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.
 

Skip Foreplay

New member
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
35
MBTI Type
ENxP
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
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
A problem is too much naturalism could lead to this:

borg-7of9-2.jpg


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.
 

Qlip

Post Human Post
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
8,464
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
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.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
So when you give your vibrator a name thats soulifieing an intimate object ? :D
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
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?
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
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.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Read it that way if you like, its not what I had intended.

Strawman -- he didn't say he wasted time in kindergarten.
Ad hominem -- "the key to the entire post is [the strawman]", the implication being that the rest of his points are not to be considered. And you mentioned the poster's personality which is completely irrelevant.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Strawman -- he didn't say he wasted time in kindergarten.
Ad hominem -- "the key to the entire post is [the strawman]", the implication being that the rest of his points are not to be considered. And you mentioned the poster's personality which is completely irrelevant.

Alright then, discussion's done then isnt it?
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
Strawman -- he didn't say he wasted time in kindergarten.
Ad hominem -- "the key to the entire post is [the strawman]", the implication being that the rest of his points are not to be considered. And you mentioned the poster's personality which is completely irrelevant.

Don't you see what Lark is trying to say, Evan? If the OP is a complete douche with no values, then surely the content of his post will be complete douchebaggery as well. Indeed, we can determine what he does on a daily basis, how he conducts himself, and what his real intentions are, but only as long as we completely ignore what he is saying. If he sounds even remotely foreign, then we must never overlook the opportunity to purge this member from our sight with the handy dandy ignore function.
 
R

ReflecTcelfeR

Guest
I think it's more interesting to try and objectively describe a soul, and if naturalistic thinking is in exact opposition, seeing as a soul could still be a chemical process; which, may, or may not indicate a personality towards any sort of finality within thinking.

Animism may still be a projection, but could that not be enough to actually place a soul within an object? Just some thoughts.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Animism

Animism is coming back as we join electronic tribes like Central in the global village.

Naturalism was the result of 400 years of the printing press and literacy. And so animism was seen to be illiterate and tribal.

And as we are moving into the electronic tribal world animism seems more natural.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Animism is coming back as we join electronic tribes like Central in the global village.

Naturalism was the result of 400 years of the printing press and literacy. And so animism was seen to be illiterate and tribal.

And as we are moving into the electronic tribal world animism seems more natural.

You need to lay off the McLuhan.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Our Patron Saint

You need to lay off the McLuhan.

I am a pius young man and Marshall McLuhan is the patron saint of the internet.

And if we wish to understand what we are doing here, all we need to do to turn to Marshall McLuhan.

And apart from the fact that Saint McLuhan is a genius, he is also optimistic and positive.
 

mattheworman

New member
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
2
MBTI Type
ENTj
Yeah, animism makes no sense. Naturalism (even reductionism) is the way to go.

Animism is just projection.

rational reductionism can show that animism and naturalism are indistinguishable, fundamentally. are you interested in understanding why?
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
rational reductionism can show that animism and naturalism are indistinguishable, fundamentally. are you interested in understanding why?

I'm interested in knowing how you would explain it -- I can think of a way they might be explained as compatible also, but it seems like a bit of a stretch.
 
Top