Do materialist lay-people have anything interesting to offer?

#1
By lay-people I mean those who aren't doing the research themselves. Those people seem to just trot out one version or another of "science says" over and over. Which could be interesting . . . if most of us here weren't already very familiar with the beliefs and claims of orthodoxy. As it . . . it's just puzzling. If you're so enamored of the orthodox canon why are you coming to this site in the first place?

I do get why those who have - at least - an inkling that there is much beyond materialism but like to see more research opening to that beyond would come here. I also get why those who are genuinely open to the possibility of beyond would come here. But yeah . .
 
#2
Personally I don't tend to frame my posts in terms of materialism. I don't really care about materialism. I'm interested in discussing the evidence for psi and in particular parapsychology.

As a lay person I have certain limitations with regard to understanding some aspects of these papers in which case I ask questions.

My current focus has been on how reliable and how we should interpret the findings of parapsychological papers.

As for whether I have anything to offer, opinions differ...

Here's an example of my lay analysis of one parapsychology paper: http://www.skeptiko.com/forum/threads/the-van-lommel-lancet-nde-paper.110/ I think it contains value, but again - opinions differ... :)
 
#3
By lay-people I mean those who aren't doing the research themselves. Those people seem to just trot out one version or another of "science says" over and over. Which could be interesting . . . if most of us here weren't already very familiar with the beliefs and claims of orthodoxy. As it . . . it's just puzzling. If you're so enamored of the orthodox canon why are you coming to this site in the first place?

I do get why those who have - at least - an inkling that there is much beyond materialism but like to see more research opening to that beyond would come here. I also get why those who are genuinely open to the possibility of beyond would come here. But yeah . .
Hi Saiko, sounds a bit like "all seekers are welcome as long as they think like me" ;). Obviously, the skeptics would be the first to admit that "materialist" science is an awful long way from working everything out (and likely never will), which leaves us "open" to anything based on evidence. The elephant in the forum (IMO) is that there appears to be less ideological distance between some of the moderate, evidence based proponents and enquiring skeptics, than there is between the moderate proponents and the "anything goes" fringe.

Maybe you could bring your "science beyond materialism" thread over here from C&S and we could thrash out how that might work?
 
Last edited:

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Nap, interrupted.
Member
#4
By lay-people I mean those who aren't doing the research themselves. Those people seem to just trot out one version or another of "science says" over and over. Which could be interesting . . . if most of us here weren't already very familiar with the beliefs and claims of orthodoxy. As it . . . it's just puzzling. If you're so enamored of the orthodox canon why are you coming to this site in the first place?
Why is it that these same questions don't apply to all other metaphysical hypotheses?

~~ Paul
 
#6
Hi Saiko, sounds a bit like "all seekers are welcome as long as they think like me" ;). Obviously, the skeptics would be the first to admit that "materialist" science is an awful long way from working everything out (and likely never will), which leaves us "open" to anything based on evidence. The elephant in the forum (IMO) is that there appears to be less ideological distance between some of the moderate, evidence based proponents and enquiring skeptics, than there is between the moderate proponents and the "anything goes" fringe.

Maybe you could bring your "science beyond materialism" thread over here from C&S and we could thrash out how that might work?
Wow! Really? That's what you gleaned huh. Try again if you will. I'm not going to do the back-and-forth on these types of "miss the point" stuff anymore
 
#7
Wow! Really? That's what you gleaned huh. Try again if you will. I'm not going to do the back-and-forth on these types of "miss the point" stuff anymore
Completely understand. If you wanted to discuss these things you would've started a thread in a discussion forum. Oh.... Hang on...
 
#8
Completely understand. If you wanted to discuss these things you would've started a thread in a discussion forum. Oh.... Hang on...
An interesting MO you have there . Step 1/ Miss the point and respond with an unproductive tangent Step 2 When step 1 is pointed out to you , cast assertions that the OP doesn't want to discuss things.
 
#9
As opposed to starting what appears to be a provocative, unhelpful thread, and being even less helpful when people reply. If you think I (and Paul) have missed the point, and responded tangentially, perhaps you didn't make your point clearly enough?
 

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Nap, interrupted.
Member
#10
That statement, on top of many others you've posted, has me conclude that your overall comprehension is - in general - poor.
And this reply leads me to believe you can't answer the question.

What the hell is the point of starting this thread and then immediately turning it into a meta-conversation?

~~ Paul
 
#11
And this reply leads me to believe you can't answer the question.

What the hell is the point of starting this thread and then immediately turning it into a meta-conversation?

~~ Paul
Certain things lead me to think that you are being genuine. And that's scary. Because it means you really are not seeing your expressions clearly. I can tell you that - so far as responding to my posts you are often off in a different ballpark. I'd suggest - taking a step-back and reviewing some of what you post to and what your posts are.

As for "can't answer" - I have no interest in veering into te usual irrelevant things that have nothing to do with the point.
 
#13
As opposed to starting what appears to be a provocative, unhelpful thread, and being even less helpful when people reply. If you think I (and Paul) have missed the point, and responded tangentially, perhaps you didn't make your point clearly enough?
I just re-read and the point is clear. Arouet got it and responded in line with it. Paul regularly doesn't get it.
 
#14
P

As for whether I have anything to offer, opinions differ...
:D I'm of the opinion that of course you have something to offer! Your opinions are as worthy as anyone else's. Now . . do you have something to offer that isn't part of the materialist canon is the topic. I'll give your work a look-see. Thanks for sharing.
 
#17
I was wondering if you could state it in your own words.
I see no point in that. There are cases where my definition of a term is different to the standard and/or common usage but this isn't one of those. If you read the Wikipedia entries you'll know what I mean bu the term.
 

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Nap, interrupted.
Member
#18
Certain things lead me to think that you are being genuine. And that's scary. Because it means you really are not seeing your expressions clearly. I can tell you that - so far as responding to my posts you are often off in a different ballpark. I'd suggest - taking a step-back and reviewing some of what you post to and what your posts are.

As for "can't answer" - I have no interest in veering into te usual irrelevant things that have nothing to do with the point.
I can reread your opening post another half dozen times and I still won't understand why you think that "materialist" laypeople have nothing to offer while other laypeople do. Perhaps the thread title is misleading and you're simply asking why a "materialist" would be interested in this forum.

Answer: Because some of the subject matter is interesting to me.

~~ Paul
 
Last edited:
#19
I see no point in that. There are cases where my definition of a term is different to the standard and/or common usage but this isn't one of those. If you read the Wikipedia entries you'll know what I mean bu the term.
The wiki doesn't state what makes a person a materialist.

Can you at least give your own definition of that?
 
Top