99% of the time, Materialism means being driven by greed(material wealth), while idealism means being driven by moral principles(ideals). This set of definitions is NOT the one that philosophers used.

Marx and Engels discussed materialism and idealism in philosophy, which is a completely different thing. Even in philosophy, both terms are extremely vague and are not enough to mean anything on their own without pages upon pages of elaboration.

It's laughable how online leftists throw around these words without even knowing what they mean. No, calling something "idealist" is not a valid critique and saying "material conditions" instead of "reality" does not make your argument stronger. Read an actual book for once and never ever use those words again. Save them for serious writing of substance.

    • Castor_Troy [comrade/them,he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      yea, this is a rabbit hole lol I've gone into this a few times before and am not sure how productive this conversation can be. Mind being an epiphenomena of the brain is an assumption, a philosophical position, that is not an actual scientific fact. There are other areas of knowledge that point to that assumption being incorrect. One example is research into near-death experiences.

        • Castor_Troy [comrade/them,he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          There are studied reports of people having mystical near-death experiences when they are measurably basically brain dead. Of course this also can't be stated as a fact in the same way other concrete material statements can be.

          If I understand correctly, also psilocybin intoxication actually results in reduced brain activity. So, even if there is causation from matter to consciousness like that, it's still basically impossible to explain exactly how that works in a concrete sense.