Idealabilism and Materialabilism

Hassan Ajami
Hassanajami25@yahoo.com

2021 / 7 / 12

Things are neither ideal nor material, but have abilities to be ideal´-or-material. This implies that things are processes and not static states. And this is why everything in the universe is constantly changing. Given certain circumstances, things are material. But, given other circumstances, the same things are abstract, immaterial, and ideal.

Idealabilism is a philosophical theory which says that any object in our universe is characterized by a unique property called idealability. And idealability is the ability to be ideal. For idealabilism, the objects of our universe have idealabilities which are the abilities to be ideal. Therefore, the objects of our universe are not ideal, but rather they are in a process of becoming ideal, and they actually become ideal given certain circumstances, such as scientifically perceiving them as being ideal, e.g. scientifically perceiving them as abstract sets of information´-or-mathematical equations. Our universe is idealable in the sense that it could become ideal when we successfully and scientifically perceive it as being abstract, immaterial, and ideal, such as perceiving it to be a set of abstract information´-or-a set of abstract mathematical equations. According to idealabilism, our universe has the property of idealabilization, i.e. the ability of becoming ideal when certain conditions are satisfied, such as successfully and scientifically perceiving it as ideal.

From the same perspective, materialabilism says that things in themselves are neither material nor ideal, but they become material when we perceive them as being material. For materialabilism, things have a unique property called materialability. And materialability is the ability of things to be material when we perceive them as being material. In this sense, we make things either material´-or-ideal depending on how we perceive the universe. In other words, for materialabilism, the objects of our universe have the property of materialabilization, which is the ability to become material, given the right circumstances. Things are materialable in the sense that they become material when we successfully and scientifically perceive them as material, such as perceiving them as being material atoms.

If things in our universe were abstract and ideal, then they would not be material because the material is the opposite of the abstract and ideal. But things in our universe are scientifically material consisting of material atoms and particles. Therefore, things are neither abstract nor ideal. On the other hand, if things in our universe were material, then they would not be abstract and ideal. But they are also scientifically abstract and ideal because the universe is also successfully and scientifically defined as a set of abstract information (as the physicist John Wheeler says)´-or-as a set of abstract mathematical equations (as the physicist Max Tegmark says). Thus, things are not material. All of this shows that things in our universe are neither abstract and ideal nor material, leading to the acceptance of idealabilism and materialabilism which hold that the objects of our universe are neither abstract and ideal nor material. Yet they can’t but be either abstract´-or-material, otherwise they can’t exist, given that any possible existence is either abstract´-or-material-;- there is no other alternative option for things to be. Therefore, the only option left for us is to hold that we form things as either abstract and ideal´-or-material, although things in themselves are neither abstract and ideal nor material. And this is exactly the position of both idealabilism and materialabilism.

When we successfully and scientifically study the universe as being abstract and ideal (such as being an abstract set of information), it becomes scientifically abstract and ideal, otherwise we wouldn’t have been scientifically successful in portraying the universe as abstract and ideal, but scientists were successful in that endeavor. Yet when we successfully and scientifically study the universe as being material (such as consisting of material atoms), it becomes material, otherwise we wouldn’t have been scientifically successful in studying the universe as being material, while, in fact, the scientists were successful in doing so. All of this shows that the universe in itself is neither abstract and ideal nor material, but we make it abstract and ideal´-or-material in light of how we successfully and scientifically study it, i.e. in light of our scientific perceptions.



https://www.ahewar.org/eng
Modern Discussion