Your welcome; but, I wasn't posting to support your argument. The discussions merged to This common point. I do not have a definition of materialism but have been using and debating the definition of others. I don't even know what the classical definition of materialism is; but, then I don't think that many here do either or care. As usual Fliption, we think alike and agree on many points comeing from different place for different reasons. It is a measure of another man's intelligence how much he agrees with you. You obviously are very intelligent.
I don't think that Royce has any idea what he is up too either. I am at a complete lost at how the term material or materialism can be perverted to mean everything. The only way that this could be so is the absolute unreasonable dogma that nothing but material exists and the absolute refusal to consider the possiblity of anything else, immaterial or non-material, to exist much less debate about it.
This is the closed mind in absolute denial of any or all other possiblitites that Les and I are talking about. Les's point has been made and validated by the definition that FZ+ and others are using.
FZ+ has been hoisted on his own petard by his own posts and definition. To be consistant, of course, he can never see it much less admit it.
Oh no! Not another Materialism vs non-materialism thread!
Trying to come up with a workable definition I can see.