Can the development of science show that materialism is right and idealism is wrong?

I don't think it can be confirmed, idealism is that consciousness is above all else, materialism does not recognize consciousness, only recognizes what really exists, from the perspective of all kinds of things now, materialism does have the upper hand, but both of these theories were discovered before, if the current scientific development completely denies idealism, then it is not true. <>

In fact, I also belong to a member of idealism, but I still believe in materialism, I just think that the existence of consciousness is very necessary, sometimes, people's thinking can change the result and direction of a thing, and as long as people have enough consciousness, then she can also burst out a lot of potential that does not belong to herself, for example, there are many people who have cancer in the unsolved mysteries of the world but live longer because of optimism. <>

Idealism and Materialism To be honest, science today cannot fully explain everything, so the existence of idealism is necessary, I once asked people around me why they believe in religion, and they said that there are some things, as long as you believe in religion, then you can get the answer. It's not that our science is bad, but our science can still be improved and improved, and I think that many areas of science today are contrary to nature, such as experiments, such as biology and physics, these two subjects, the same is the study of the outside world, the same is the study of itself. <>

Is idealism wrong When I hope to achieve something, I will always look forward to it in my heart, so this is why I believe in idealism, I believe that human willpower is very strong, as long as there is strong willpower, then we can achieve a lot of consequences that we could not achieve before.

In general, science is developing, and maybe one day, science will reach a certain height and can completely deny idealism, but it cannot be denied from the present, so let's look forward to the day when science develops, after all, science is what we can see and touch.

There is no wrong or right, it depends on how you use dialectical logic to explain the two isms, prove them with arguments and data, and achieve results that are both right, materialism and idealism are not opposites, they are interconnected and there is no contradiction at all, and matter goes from existence to nothing"It is also a cyclical process from nothing, and matter has atoms. Nucleus. And proton.

Electrons are formed in a magnetic field. Gravitation. Under the action of various energy pressures, atoms begin to gather and become visible and tangible objects, and then matter will die out in an indefinite time, be disassembled and scattered in space.

Disappear without a trace! This process is stipulated by the law of entropy increase, we cannot resist and cannot know, we only know the evolution process of a small part of the matter in the middle, and we cannot know all the process from the beginning to the end! can only be regulated into"God"power of the work.

Hence the idealism with"Materialism"As long as both views are well interpreted, they are both correct, and there is no better or worse one.

The development of science still cannot explain which is correct between materialism and idealism, because there are still many phenomena that cannot be explained by science. Both idealism and materialism have their own meanings.

No, the development of science only focuses on the study of things, excluding the mind, and does not even know the principle and essence of the mind, how can it prove that idealism is wrong, and scientific research objects can only express their views on things, and have no say in the mind.

The development of science can show that materialism and idealism are both one-sided and incomplete, and that the only thing that can rationally unify the two is cosmic energetics, which is the smallest unit of combination of energy for all matter and living things, and the energy of the sun for the matter and life of the solar system.

The two are one and the same thing, two different manifestations. There is both the manifestation of matter and the manifestation of energy. It's not that they make mistakes, which one is right and which one is primary.

It is the physiological structure of human beings that can only be observed, and modern physics does not have a more advanced way to thoroughly understand what is going on with them. Only some superficial understandings can be explained. For example, they are different manifestations, and physicists can't explain how they came to be.

Personally, I am materialistic, because materialism can give good arguments and evidence, while idealism gives speculation and conjecture. And the only thing that can fully prove itself in the two is materialism.

With the progress of science and technology, it is possible to unify idealism and materialism in the future, which is the greatest progress of human wisdom and the original intention of top scientists to study theology!

Although the development of modern science has confirmed the correctness of materialism, there are also many questions that cannot be answered by science at present, and idealism cannot be directly denied.

Two different things, science is to explore and research to achieve; Materialism is only relatively speaking, the relationship that exists with each other, and this is a fundamental nature.

One thinks that the mind is the first important, and the other thinks that things other than the mind are the first important, and it has nothing to do with science.

Materialism and "idealism" are definitely wrong, and the fault lies in "only".

The more technology develops, the less it can be proved that technology is technology, and why Newton ended up in theology, because God created everything.

The argument of idealism and materialism is not scientific.

Both idealism and materialism are wrong.

My analogy: It's like it"People eat or eat people"Does the statement of these two ends sound equal to nothing? Actually, there is"Idealism and materialism"The train of thought?.

Materialism is animal thinking.

Science is the ...... of discovery and then understandingWithout the excellence of the predecessors, how can there be the achievements of the younger generations? ......

Dialectical materialism holds that thinking is a highly organized substance, that is, a function of the human brain, and that the human brain is the organ of thinking. Thinking is a unique form of reflection of people in society, and its emergence and development are closely linked to social practice and language. Thinking is the unique cognitive ability of human beings, and it is the advanced form of human consciousness to grasp objective things.

On the basis of social practice, thinking analyzes and synthesizes perceptual materials, and through the forms of concepts, judgments, and reasoning, it creates a logical theoretical system that reflects the essential attributes and laws of motion of objective things.

The thinking process is a process from concrete to abstract and then from abstract to concrete, and its purpose is to reproduce the essence of objective things in thinking and achieve a concrete understanding of objective things. The laws of thinking are determined by the laws of the external world, and it is the reflection of the laws of the external world in the process of human thinking.

(1) From a fundamental point of view, materialism and idealism are fundamentally opposed, and materialism is correct and authoritarian.

Mentalism is wrong.

2) From the point of view of the process of philosophical development, materialism developed in struggle with idealism. Idealistic philosophy is obviously a new stage in the development of philosophy compared to its predecessor materialist philosophy. The philosophy of idealism also enriched and developed dialectics in the course of its development.

Therefore, idealism has its progressive and correct factors in the history of its development, and it cannot be absolutely concluded that all idealism is wrong.

3) Both right and wrong are comparative. Compared with Marxist philosophy, both idealistic philosophy and old materialist philosophy have a wrong side. Therefore. It cannot be said that everything materialism is correct.

Our philosophy teacher said there was no way to prove it, it was just a belief. High school philosophy books are written about the mainstream view of today's (socialist) society, and I don't want to think too much about it, because I can't go crazy and drive myself crazy, philosophy is such a difficult subject...

First, and copy.

No one can prove it.

For subjective idealism, no one can prove that the universe that belongs to them after death does not exist, for objective idealism, no one can prove that God is fictional, and even many supernatural events cannot be explained by science, so why can't there be a God. I don't think it's right about materialism, it's just that it's officially right.

Wang Dongyue's Department of Philosophy (28) Why materialism, idealism and agnosticism.

If we talk about materialism and idealism, we are fighting over who is right with materialism or idealism?

Once, the geocentric theory was considered correct, and later the heliocentric theory was considered correct, and then there was a big ** theory of the universe. The so-called correctness is only correct in the pattern of cognition. When an individual or some people step out of the ordinary perception and express a deviant viewpoint, whether it is correct or not, it is easy to judge it as incorrect.

Materialism or idealism, who is more inclined to science? This is a contradiction, and no matter which choice you choose, it is wrong. Matter belongs to the common characteristics of things, and consciousness belongs to a kind of independent characteristics of things.

The common characteristics and independent characteristics of all things in the world are one. Matter and consciousness choose one of them.

First, the other is second, and the establishment of corresponding opposing theories is nothing more than ignorance in the cognitive pattern.

Of course, materialism is more inclined to science, because idealism believes that I think, therefore I am, while materialism believes that matter exists objectively no matter what, which coincides with the scientific view.

Science is academic is ideology, engineering technology is skill contact with matter, science is idealism, engineering technology contact with material can be called materialism, can produce matter, so idealism depends on engineering technology to produce materialism, material can be exchanged, so as to produce ** and economy, and then promote the imbalance between low materialism and high-tech materialism, idealism will engage in ideas around the country to prevent engineering technology, materialism or towards engineering technology to serve idealistic science!

The definitions, theories and methods of operation and the customary fields of science are all materialistic. Idealism, on the other hand, is a deeper science, and is more studied in the field of religion in general. In fact, the mind is the root of things, the mind and things are one, and things are the form of the mind.

This involves a higher level of understanding and mental methods, which requires substantial progress through cultivation and is closely related to the individual's mental nature.

Idealism and materialism are just a means of understanding the world, and they are only standing at the current level of understanding, an understanding of the world. If you have to say who is more inclined to science, I think it is better to say who is more inclined to science now, I think it is materialism. It can also be said that the current level of science and technology is more in line with the world and is materialistic.

Chen's Universe Model (Chinese Taiji Universe Model): As long as it is an "ism", whether it is materialism or idealism, it is the product of human consciousness, and human consciousness may or may not be scientific. Therefore, there is no question of who is more scientific between the two, and it is necessary to take matters into account.

Materialism and idealism are two different worldviews, idealism is more perceptual and materialism is more rational when it comes to understanding things. Rationally looking at things will be more objective, so materialism is more biased towards science.

Of course, it is materialism, idealism exaggerates subjective initiative, materialism emphasizes that subjective desires conform to objective laws, and facts have proved that the power to dominate and transform reality does not come from simple thinking activities, but from the correct reflection of thinking on the objective world, and this correct reflection comes from the first place, first of all, material practical activities.

Another analogy is the relationship between action and reaction, materialism believes that the action force is one, and the reaction force is two. Idealism, on the other hand, does not see it that way, they believe that the reaction is very strong, so there is the theory of spiritual omnipotence. Do not say.

Anyway, I think it's very important for the whole party to study Marxist theory as a whole.

The spirit of science is to doubt everything, so idealism can promote the sustainable development of science. However, science needs to be verified, so it is materialism that proves that idealism is the means to promote the development of science.

Science was developed by materialism, which exists only in the philosophical category. Materialism believes that the world is composed of materials, consciousness is people's understanding of matter, and the process of people's understanding of matter is science.

Idealism is the most advanced philosophical thinking of human beings, questioning and demonstrating unknown natural phenomena, Einstein is a great philosopher and an idealist and materialist, a physicist and a mathematician.

There is neither materialism nor idealism, and the question itself is a false proposition. Idealism appears, for consciousness changes, everyone's world is actually different, how to argue that the way of heaven is the same. After reading Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism, if you discuss this issue again, you will find that you are very naïve, if you still don't believe it, then read Mao Xuan!