Talk:Physicalism
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Physicalism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
Physicalism was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
|
This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Physical monism vs David Deutsch and Sean M. Carroll's Absolute rationalism (old rationalists irrationally believed in soul as a simple (philosophy) without any elaboration of its Brodmann-like modalities and correct wiring = connectome [or how it works without them]) edit
David Deutsch and Sean M. Carroll use physicalism to simply mean absolute rationalism. Many (not all) Croatian atheists overfocus on aspects of monism when they use the term physicalism.
No Mention of Quantum Mechanics? edit
It seems very odd this article makes no mention of quantum mechanics, considering that it's the best description of the fundamental nature of reality that science currently provides, as well as the profound implications the theory has to the question of what it means for something to be "physical" in the first place. Is that purposeful? Surely at least a brief mention of wave function collapse and entanglement would be an important addition. Betamaleparticle (talk) 00:25, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- a) Do you have any reliable sources that discuss "wave function collapse and entanglement" in connection with physicalism?
- b) This article is about physicalism, not physics.
- c) It's not clear that any of the views and arguments discussed in the article would change if we lived in a strictly Newtonian world with no quantum mechanics. Jibal (talk) 07:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
There should be an objections/criticism section edit
I think the article should feature a section which mentions some common objections, criticism or attempts to refute physicalism. I am not an expert on the topic, just saying that the article feels incomplete without this. 213.175.38.130 (talk) 14:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Separate physicalism to: physical monism and physical logicism (unitary logic is wrong for many neologicists) edit
Typically many people argue for hours and their main argument is different definitions of a noun. This is very common because people have emotions for terms. 2A02:2149:8A2D:F400:301D:6D07:4B97:3B35 (talk) 17:36, 18 May 2024 (UTC)