The Arguments For Structural Functional Materialism Over Simple Materialism

From Aware Theory
Jump to: navigation, search

The Arguments For Structural Functional Materialism Over Simple Materialism

Structural Functional Materialism simply stated is that identical structure and functioning of a material body produces identical consciousness and ixperiencitness.

Simple materialism is actually a more complex and less coherent theory than structural functional materialism. It is called simple because it is based on limited knowledge and its predictions are limited or simple as well. There are versions of simple materialism that make an effort to conform to the scientific and logical inconsistencies that it creates.


Many people that do not believe in supernatural entities such as souls, ghosts, and spirits, believe in a form of simple materialism. The consequence of a belief in simple materialism is that people believe that once a person is dead and not revivable that this is the permanent end of their consciousness existence. On the surface this seems like a very rational belief. But as what usually happens as we scientifically know more about ourselves and the universe around us simple materialism proves lacking in its completeness, predictive ability, usefulness, coherence with science, and experimental evidence.


The basic difference between simple materialism and structural functional materialism is that simple materialism ties a specific ixperiencitness to a specific conscious body. It is fair to say that discussions about simple materialism has not used the term ixperiencitness before, which is one of the reasons that it has not been able to as complete and coherent as it might have otherwise been.


Depending on the version of simple materialism one specific body is tied to only one consciousness and ixperiencitness.

Depending on the version of simple materialism, simple materialism ranges from the viewpoint that only one specific consciousness is tied to only one specific body, to the view point that only one specific ixperiencitness is tied to one specific consciousness producing body. In the first version different consciousness producing bodies can never produce the same consciousness. In the second version the different consciousness producing bodies can produce the same consciousness but never the same ixperiencitness.

It should be obvious, that there is not, with the current scientific terminology, the terms to accurately and simply describe what this means. The statements are more complex than the words allow for. Consciousness, for instance is a vaguely and broadly defined word. The phrase "consciousness producing body" can be replace by the word "person" but not all person are conscious and not all consciousness producing bodies are persons. The phrase "consciousness producing body" can be argued as non reality connected concept, if consciousness is not produced by a body. But scientific evidence gives us ever increasing evidence that the a human body ( and other conscious animals) produces consciousness by the complex structure and functioning of their brains. When the brain does not have the right structures or functions in the right ways it does not produce consciousness, like when it is dead.

The arguments between simple materialism and structural functional materialism assumes that consciousness is produced by the functioning of the brain and, possibly nervous system.

There are a number of arguments that make structural functional materialism a better theory than simple materialism.

First lets consider the position that every consciousness producing body, even if it has identical structure and functioning, produces a different consciousness. A body that has the exact same structure and functioning as another body will produce the exact same behavior. The behavior of the person gives insight into the consciousness produced by that body. But many different consciousness can correspond to one behavior. By using multicid and multivid experiments a more and more accurate representation of the exact consciousness produced can be determined.

If ixperiencitness does not exist as an entity beyond consciousness this argument is finished. But if identical consciousness does not imply identical ixperiencitness we have to have a reasons to believe that this is the case. The relationship between consciousness is not identical