Why isn't this obvious to people?

[Tero]

He:

Tero: Everything is tied in some way to material things, therefore it is all material.

Me: Hi Tero. Nice to meet you btw. I agree with the first part. But all you have to do is examine atomic structure to see there really is no "material". I appreciate your skepticism. Everything you will ever learn in regard to things that are more than physical will be put to the test, and that's a good thing. Etc.

Me:

There in fact is material. Comes in nice little units. We are just confused when things look solid at our level. Just because it is made of little bits and lots of gaps, in no way does it make it less "real."

[JimC]

The nature of matter at a deep level is indeed complex, interesting and counter-intuitive in many ways, as well as being a work in progress in so far as scientific modelling goes.

However, when you hear the words "non-material", you just know there is somebody aching to fill the void with some form of vitalist, spiritual woo...

[mistermack]

Yeh, he's definitely building up to it.
It's a crap argument anyway. Material is what it is. If it includes lots of spaces, that's an integral part of it. He's obviously discounting space as nothing, which is pretty dumb.
They seem to latch onto a tiny bit of science, decide to read no further, and then try to make it say what they want it to say.
.

[Tero]

It may also have to do with chemistry being "diffficult". Especially organic, where you would have gotten to use the stick models. With those in hand, you can see how bonds are fixed in space, and matter has structure at that level.

[Azathoth]

The stick models are a lie though. It isn't really like that it just helps to think of it that way

[Tero]

Well, the atoms certainly have volume, you can't have two atoms occupy the same space, they are not very compressible. Not a lot different from styrofoam balls. The bonds are fuzzy things, but they are fixed, they do not invert for example, unless you get an actual reaction on the molecule. Bonds vibrate and bend.

Meanwhile Joe came back to me with this:

Joe: True dat. Great description of (multi) dimensionality there.

Hell, everything we think we know is based on theory...so we don't know much do we. I don't want to get lost in the tone of these debates. The important thing isn't to be "right"...it's to be happy.

[Ronja]

Meanwhile Joe came back to me with this:

Joe: ... The important thing isn't to be "right"...it's to be happy.

Check this thread out for counter-arguments http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=17151

[mistermack]

I don't want to get lost in the tone of these debates. The important thing isn't to be "right"...it's to be happy

Spoken like a true junkie!!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

He:

Tero: Everything is tied in some way to material things, therefore it is all material.

Me: Hi Tero. Nice to meet you btw. I agree with the first part. But all you have to do is examine atomic structure to see there really is no "material". I appreciate your skepticism. Everything you will ever learn in regard to things that are more than physical will be put to the test, and that's a good thing. Etc.

Me:

There in fact is material. Comes in nice little units. We are just confused when things look solid at our level. Just because it is made of little bits and lots of gaps, in no way does it make it less "real."

tl:dr

[electricwhiteboy]

The nature of matter at a deep level is indeed complex, interesting and counter-intuitive in many ways, as well as being a work in progress in so far as scientific modelling goes.

However, when you hear the words "non-material", you just know there is somebody aching to fill the void with some form of vitalist, spiritual woo...

Information can describe something non-material, i.e. the word unicorn. However, to the best of my knowledge, information cannot exist independently of matter or energy. A problem comes in because as human we’re influenced by a lot of things that don’t exist objectively. Borders between countries, leadership, the symbolic worth of money, justice, mercy, fairness, the Universe doesn’t give much of a toss about these things. We are required to believe in things that don't exist.

[JimC]

The nature of matter at a deep level is indeed complex, interesting and counter-intuitive in many ways, as well as being a work in progress in so far as scientific modelling goes.

However, when you hear the words "non-material", you just know there is somebody aching to fill the void with some form of vitalist, spiritual woo...

Information can describe something non-material, i.e. the word unicorn. However, to the best of my knowledge, information cannot exist independently of matter or energy. A problem comes in because as human we’re influenced by a lot of things that don’t exist objectively. Borders between countries, leadership, the symbolic worth of money, justice, mercy, fairness, the Universe doesn’t give much of a toss about these things. We are required to believe in things that don't exist.

Interesting point. It is perhaps best to regard labels such as the words you have used as tags for relational propositions between material entities, such as humans...