That makes sense in materialist metaphysics, but in recent decades materialism has become increasingly contested in philosophical circles. Philosophers like Bernardo Kastrup, Phillip Goff and David Chalmers being among the most prominent of its critics.
Personally, I would respect them, but not if they go against basic science. You can’t just declare some sort of metaphysics and completely ignore actual physics.
How do you know the beginning/end location is a void of nothingness?
Because non-conciousness with no brain activity is pretty simply “nothing”. Nothing is going on in you, so what you must be experiencing is nothing.
That makes sense in materialist metaphysics, but in recent decades materialism has become increasingly contested in philosophical circles. Philosophers like Bernardo Kastrup, Phillip Goff and David Chalmers being among the most prominent of its critics.
as a relatively new philosophy nerd, please maybe show me some good reads by those folk? currently working through some Beaudrillard…
Absolutely!
Bernardo Kastrup: Materialism is Boloney
Phillip Goff: Galileo’s Error
David Chalmers: Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness (This is his famous essay in which he coined the term “the hard problem of consciousness.”)
I find Bernardo Kastrup’s case for analytic idealism to be the most compelling.
thanks!
I don’t respect people whose job title is “Sit in a room, and think about stuff”
Personally, I would respect them, but not if they go against basic science. You can’t just declare some sort of metaphysics and completely ignore actual physics.