We question the prevailing paradigm of physicalist cosmology. In its place we propose a theory of psychic emergence. This video was recorded in Myrtle Beach, SC on October 28, 2023. Chris Ott Hub: https://sites.google.com/view/chris-ott-hub/home
Matter is a theoretical entity. However the properties of tangible objects, like mass, weight, and solidity, which we normally associate with materiality are readily observable. Here we describe how the Evolution of Perception theory accounts for the evolution of these material properties.
Another way to say this is that although matter does not exist as a discreet substance, and therefore did not evolve, the properties like solidity we normally ascribe to matter did. And that amounts to the same thing.
Recorded in Myrtle Beach, SC June 2023.
Look at an object. Neuroscience tells us that color, sound, fragrance, flavor, and feel (the qualities we perceive) are all subjective, produced in the brain to represent external conditions we cannot directly experience. Remove these qualities and what do you have? An occult (unseen) substance called "matter." It follows from the above that matter is a theoretical entity.
In this video I reflect aloud on my overall intention in doing over 100 videos on philosophy and I bid farewell, at least for now. Part of knowledge is knowing when to stop.
Other material by me can be found at the Chris Ott Hub: https://sites.google.com/view/chris-ott-hub/home
The book by George Berkeley that I mention in this video is 'Alciphron' (first published in 1732). The book is written in the form of seven dialogues in which Berkeley argues with the so-called 'free-thinkers' of his day that the existence of God is rationally necessary. Berkeley foresaw what he believed was a dangerous trend of atheism, a prophecy that has sadly come true in the West.
This video was recorded and uploaded in Myrtle Beach, SC on December 15, 2023 by Christopher Ott.
Note: I apologize for the confusing lighting, which can be distracting and annoying. I would redo it, except I'm pretty sure I would not be able to repeat it. I didn't have notes. I simply took a stab at a conclusion, which had been on my mind to do for a long time, and I feel like it generally worked out. It conveyed what I wanted it to convey and accomplished what I wanted to accomplish. Best wishes to all who have accompanied me on this five year journey. Who knows what I'll do next. I like to surprise myself. – CO
There are two main questions materialism cannot answer. One is ontological and has to do with the mathematical laws of physics. The other is epistemological and has to do with our innate intuitions undergirding the laws of logic. In this video I use the words "material" and "physical" in their colloquial sense.
This video was recorded in Myrtle Beach on October 1, 2023. This series of 20 videos on "Metaphysics" was originally recorded from June 1 - Oct. 4, 2023.
Chris Ott Hub: https://sites.google.com/view/chris-ott-hub/home
"God Speaks" https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U731DguBwyUHOhcxaEFaa31odkhHfrBI/view
"Intelligence Notebooks" https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lj4p2lAc2gXzzA2N4cv9EYX1AHy3289X/view
About the Intelligence Notebooks: https://sites.google.com/view/intelligencematerials/home
Chris Ott Hub: https://sites.google.com/view/chris-ott-hub/home
This is a redo of part 11 of this series on metaphysics. In it I attempt to better clarify the four main points in the first video. In review they are:
1. It is much harder to prove a proposition than most people realize. A philosophical skeptic is a person who, for philosophical reasons, believes absolute certainty to be strictly impossible.
2. Even logic can't fully resolve a feud between interlocutors over whether a proposition is true or not. No matter how carefully we apply logic, our logical conclusions (both deductive and inductive) are only as true as our premises. And logic cannot help us determine if they are true. For that we rely on testimony and observation, which are imperfect. If one is being consistent (has no contradictions) one is being logical, but that doesn't establish that one's opinions are true, only that one's opinions are logical. One can have a completely false system of beliefs that has no contradictions.
3. Philosophical skepticism is meant to keep us undogmatic in our beliefs, i.e. to help us maintain an open mind as we seek the truth. However, if one adopts the hardened view that knowledge is impossible, one ironically winds up contradicting himself, by making a knowledge claim while at the same time claiming we can have no such knowledge. This contradiction implies a logical error somewhere. I present an alternative form of skepticism that I call "positive skepticism." In short, positive skepticism is the prescriptive attitude that, in the face of our uncertainty about things, all things remain possible. This is in contrast to the descriptive form of skepticism that declares certainty that knowledge is impossible. I call that "negative skepticism." I assert that positive skepticism (the prescriptive attitude that, until we know otherwise, all things remain possible) allows us to maintain a very open mind, and yet does not lead us to make a contradiction, or to sink into an unjustified cynicism about knowledge all together.
4. Finally, I go over a form of logic that I introduce in my 2022 book "The Evolution of Perception Re-Explained." I believe this unique application of deductive logic leads to real epistemological certainty about at least one class of beliefs, if used properly.
This series of 20 videos on "Metaphysics" was originally recorded from June 1 - Oct. 4, 2023.
Web hub: https://sites.google.com/view/chris-ott-hub/home