Frontpage Summary Full text (free) Audiobook (free) Buy the book Videos Podcasts

11.4. Alternatives to reductionism

The object of our investigation is to experience. The phenomenon is non-physical, mental. It is a subjective experience, and in that sense, not an object, but to study it, we must pretend and consider it an object.

We are barred from using physical methods.

Yes, we can see a close connection between physical activity in the brain and our mental experiences, but we cannot explain the mechanism.

How can a material brain create immaterial consciousness and thoughts?

Nobody knows. This fluid but, at the same time, sharp transition between the two categories of consciousness and matter the natural sciences fail to explain.

I also postulate that experience is the only thing we know for sure exists and that it is a mental phenomenon.

So we know something about the mental, that it exists, but we don't know anything about the physical, other than that in our mental conception we experience matter and physical phenomena.

Is it not then logical to focus on the mental in itself – as a cause?

Must we not abandon reductionism and the one-sided focus on matter and physics?

In my opinion, we have no other choice if we want to move forward.

What is the alternative?

Does science deal with the mental?

We have psychology that studies subjective experiences directly. We also have the social sciences, where you examine people's behaviour interacting with others.

These cognitive systems must be incorporated into our theory, but they deal with precisely systems, whether they form a psychologically complete human being or describe the interaction between organisms.

These disciplines do not deal with what the world and humans are fundamentally.