Yeah, I was not quite seeing what you were saying there.
Thats dandy, as long as you keep in mind that physics is a historical project that is in flux…todays supernatural is tomorrows natural. The philosphical point would be to know what is really supernatural…as opposed to what might be believed to be supernatural but is not.
Think about this. What if mental phenomena, in themselves, are not physical, but they superviene on the physical. What I mean by this is that while mental phenomena may not follow the laws of physics themselves, physical phenomena does, and mental phenomena is tied to physical phenomena in such a way that they are ‘along for the ride’ for lack of better terms at the moment. Here is kinda how it would work I suppose. You have m1 mental phenomena, it happens, and because mental phenomena themselves do not follow any laws, or the laws of physics anyway so we will reject a 1 to 1 correspondence in causation, then it is completely open as to what mental phenomenon would follow…any possible mental phenomenon could follow (possible here being quite ‘big’ of course given the circumstances). But that is an ideal way of looking at it, in reality, lets say that mental phenomenon does not happen unless it is linked to the physical phenomenon that makes it possible…i.e. mental phenomenon is not physical but arises from particular organizations of matter. As we all know, or have strong evidence to believe, what mental phenomenon happens seems to a great deal contingent on what physical organization is taking place. Lets take p1 as a physical phenomenon…like a certain brain state…lets say given the laws of physics that p2 would follow from p1. Because what mental phenomenon happens is contingent on what physical phenomenon happens…then m2 might follow from m1 not because of laws tied up in mental phenomenon but because of laws tied up in physical phenomenon.
The idea is not that strange…we actually accept it regarding a lot of things…stomach aches superviene on the organization of certain biological ‘atoms’, the meaning of words superviene on physical letters and/or physical soundwaves (which themselves are purely physical and have no meaning in the sense that the words do…but meaning is to a great degree contingent on them), colors perhaps, actually…the list could go on and on. The merit I think of the view would be that mental phenomenon could both be explained and be predictable based on the physical but metaphysical may not be reducible to the physical. Of course, like with many philosophers, if you just have a hardcore gut feeling that materialism is correct, then this theory wouldn’t satisfy you no matter its explanatory power. It does however seem to be the way we do brain/mind science. We associate mental phenomenon with corresponding physical phenomena and attempt to predict what will happen to mental phenomenon based on changes in physical phenomenon…like psychoactive medicine.
That is one possible scenario that would explain why, even if mental phenomena are not physical and do not obey the laws of physics in themselves, nonetheless do not happen purely at random or are just a chaotic flux.
As far as the mental effecting the physical, I have a greater problem with that than with the physical effecting the mental, because I believe pretty strongly that if some kind of dualism is true, then something like the theory above is probably true…the mental is a result of the physical and what happens in the mental happens because of what is happening in the physical. What this might mean though is a rejection of a certain conception of freewill…but that in itself of course wouldn’t make the theory false.
I will point out though there are more ‘complex’ theories based on the principles above that do make room for mental effecting the physical.
I don’t think the laws of physics are not real and I don’t reject mental states either…they just have to be explained, either in terms of the physical or in some other way.
Trey