Do We Live in Matter or in Our Vision of Matter?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Warraq
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matter Vision
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion asserts that humans do not live in matter but rather in their perception of it, emphasizing the immaterial nature of vision and feelings. It argues that while matter exists, our understanding of it requires study, unlike our instinctual grasp of emotions and moral concepts. The conversation highlights the distinction between the material and immaterial realms, suggesting that our minds are not products of matter despite having a material neurological framework. This perspective underscores the ease with which individuals identify emotional states compared to physical ailments.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of philosophical concepts regarding materialism and immaterialism
  • Familiarity with basic psychology, particularly emotional awareness
  • Knowledge of the distinction between physical and psychological health
  • Awareness of the role of perception in human experience
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the philosophy of immaterialism and its implications on consciousness
  • Research the relationship between psychology and physical health
  • Study the neuroscience of perception and its impact on emotional understanding
  • Investigate the differences between emotional and physical pain management techniques
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, psychologists, mental health professionals, and anyone interested in the interplay between perception, emotion, and physical existence.

Warraq
We do not live in matter, we live in our vision of it. Else we would have known matter instinctively.

We live through our vision of the world, and this vision is immaterial. Matter, however, is existent. If we humans were originally material we wouldn’t need to study the laws of matter. We don’t study the laws of feelings; we instinctively know beauty, but we don’t instinctively know chemistry or geometry. This proves that we live in the realm of the soul not in the realm of matter. Everyone knows what is sad or funny without having to be given an introductory course in the comedy theater for example. But no one knows the components of the simple matter in front of them except through difficult study of physics. Even though if the causes of laughter are studied they would become a difficult science, how about the rest of moral, mental and psychological phenomena that everyone knows easily?

We are not products of matter, our minds are not evolved from matter even if we have material neurology. The nervous system is only a channel connecting our moral (immaterial) existence with our material existence.

It is a quite sufficient proof for this that man knows their mood, feelings and emotions better than their body. Almost all people go to the physician, but a lot less see the psychiatrist, which reveals the difference of percentage on the scale of knowledge. If you are in a psychological pain you can often identify the problem, but you don’t know what is going on when you have a back pain or shortness of breath except through what the doctor told you, let alone knowing the cure. Your diagnosis for your emotional problem is easier than diagnosing your physical problem. For example, you know that you are suffering from feelings of alienation for sure, but you don’t know that you are suffering from a blockage in the gall bladder except through what you learned from the doctor, and the doctor knew through what the tests and symptoms showed him/her .
That is why even though we have physical bodies, we are not only physical.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This thread does not meet the minimum requirements to post in this section nor does it qualify for any other forum.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K