Did we ever settle the practical problems about bathrooms, locker rooms and women's sports team.
No more competence here than in the legislature?

Dostoevsky seems to go back and forth about God. His tale of the suffering child in the Brothers Karamazov seems a powerful argument against a benevolent God and an argument against usual Christian polemics to justify the suffering.
AI The theme of "the suffering child" is a profound and central element in Fyodor Dostoevsky's masterpiece, "The Brothers Karamazov." It is primarily articulated through the character of Ivan Karamazov, who uses the unimaginable suffering of innocent children as a central argument for his rejection of God's creation.

Ivan presents a series of horrific anecdotes about children being tortured and abused, culminating in his famous "Rebellion" chapter where he declares that if the "eternal harmony" of the world requires the torture of even one innocent child, then he "most respectfully returns his ticket." He argues that no future good, no ultimate redemption, can justify such an immense and unmerited suffering.AI

AI "Telos" is a Greek word that generally means end, purpose, or goal. In philosophy, particularly in Aristotle's philosophy, it refers to the final cause or ultimate purpose of something. In a Christian context, telos can refer to God's ultimate plan and purpose for humanity. It's also the root of the modern term "teleology," which is the study of purposiveness or the aims of objects. AI

Telos doe not necessarily mean that a specific particular form or species was Intended. If the mechanism is nature and the process is evolution or cosmology, the sole purpose or goal might be creativity, diversity, novelty. It may have the same appeal as when we all watched the ants in our ant farm create pathways or colonies, or the AI art exhibit at the MOMA after being fed images of human art creates its own continuously unique new forms. (reminiscent of a few twilight zone episodes).
Darwin ""There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved."

Physical mathematics are not reality they are idealizations, approximations, abstractions, no satellite will over find its target or place without being able to make in course corrections because reality is just too complex. This is the fallacy of misplaced concreteness mistaking our working theories for reality).

It seem very unfortunate that the colors we perceive, the sounds we hear, the thoughts we think and the experiences that we have should be considered less real than our measurements on electrons, and other external abstractions. We are part of nature, our perceptions are part of nature. Dividing the world into primary qualities (supposedly real) and secondary qualities (supposedly mere physic imaginative additions to reality) is the "artificial bifurcation of nature" a fundamental flaw in both scientific and philosophical thought.

Einstein's theory of relativity has changed our conception of space, time and motion, but does not refer to whether space is continuous or not.
Therefore, Einstein’s theory of relativity, although forever changed our conception of space, time, and motion, still leaves the continuity of space untouched.

As the metaphysical reality of the Planck length is problematic, whether space is infinitely divisible or not, the same seems to apply also to time, whether time is infinitely divisible or not. — RussellA

No expert on the general theory of relativity or QM here but I think you will find the mathematics in GR does assume space is a continuous entity and that everything works well in the realm of the large but when one tries to apply GR to the smaller scales at which QM works the equations begin to give dubious (infinite) results. We currently work with 4 fundamental forces (strong nuclear, weak nuclear, EM and gravity). There are compatible mathematics for the first 3 which are essentially quantum (discrete not continuous and thus GR is the outlier. The most productive path for the TOE (theory of everything) or Universal Field Theory would seem to be some form of Quantum Gravity (loop, string, etc.) This would imply that neither time nor space are continuous but both would have some kind of discrete quantum formulation.
I am not sure philosophical discussions of time and space which precede our modern physics and which choose to ignore the seeming implications are relevant or reliable. There is no empty space. Space is a Dirac sea of virtual particles which appear and disappear on extremely short time scales. So the notion of empty space (devoid of matter) is purely an abstraction not a realty. There is clearly process and change in the universe (assuming we are not all brains in vat or being deceived by evil demons) but as for some universal fixed absolute time, there is no evidence. All our measures of time depend on some other process, the earth moving around the sun, the earths rotation of its axis, the sun rising and setting, the oscillations of watch spring, or vibrations of a quartz crystal or oscillations of cesium atoms and none of these are absolute all subject to the effects of acceleration or gravity (special relativity). So it would appear there is no absolute time, and time is an abstraction from change. No dimensionless points and no instants of zero duration.

but whereas Whitehead’s approach is ontological (concerned with the constituents of being), the approach I’m exploring is epistemological (concerned with the conditions of knowing). That’s why I align more closely with a Kantian perspective.

While both philosophers are deeply engaged with the relationship between mind and world, Kant approaches it by asking how the mind structures experience and knowledge, whereas Whitehead approaches it by proposing that the world itself is composed of proto-subjective events or ‘prehensions’ at every level of reality. — Wayfarer

You can try David Skrbina "Panpsychism in the West" for a survey or David Ray Griffin writings on Whitehead and panexperientialism. It is a pretty significant difference there between Kant and human minds and epistemology and Whitehead with subjectivity as an ontological feature of all of the fundamental constituents of reality "actual occasions". Kant I do not think would entertain panpsychism in any form as an explanation of human mind whereas Whitehead sees primitive experience as a fundamental feature of all of reality and process.

//although I will mention the title of the Whitehead article I mentioned yesterday, which I believe is a quote from the man himself - ‘ Apart from the Experiences of Subjects There Is Nothing, Nothing, Nothing, Bare Nothingness’,// — Wayfarer

Ah, yes, but for whitehead every event (actual occasion) is a subject onto itself, there are no vacuous entities. He does not mean just humans' and .higher forms of life. :grin: Isolated quotes lack context.

Clear horseshit. These are views of entire blocks and full stretches of highway - multiple cities, multiple neighbourhoods. This is just having blinkers on, at this stage. — AmadeusD

We have seen the pictures. We have eyes - we don't need an AI to trawl the internet for reports written by other humans. We can see the riots ourselves. — AmadeusD

Yes. Obviously. This is not a serious discussion if you think otherwise. This seals it: — AmadeusD

I am responding to this type of polemic and statement of opinion as undeniable fact. I have seen the videos and pictures (almost a continuous loop on Fox). Do they tell us more about the extent, than deaths, injuries, hospitalizations, arrests, and official statements?

I think another area of disagreement is our access to the "ding an sic}. You seem to think we are pretty much excluded from Knowledge about it. I don't envision us as cut off in that way, we arise from the world, we are embedded in the world, we have to navigate it to survive and thus I think our "representation" is pretty accurate. Just as subjective experience is as much part of nature (and philosophy) as scientific investigation, we are part of nature not isolated from it..

No deaths', yet that I am aware of. Relatively few serious injuries or arrests. I am concerned about National Guard and active duty Marines with lethal ammunition. I am old enough to remember Kent State during the Vietnam protests. Yes, that should be part of the metric for the extent of the "riots". it would seem for a rational analysis.

But the damage here seems more extensive than that. The optics of burning cars and people waving foreign flags in front of them is obviously not great for building wider sympathy at the very least. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Yes, but how would any of us actually know? I sort of agree it's hard to trust the media these days, Fox news versus MSNBC would make you think these events are on different planets. If we cannot trust the officials on the ground and in charge then who do we turn to? All part of our modern dilemma. Maybe put some dromes' in the air for a birds eye view.

I don't live in LA but I have been there. This does not compare to Watts or the Rodney King riots. By report confined to about 5 blocks as violence goes. I don't understand how looking at a few video clips and pictures makes anyone think they can judge the scope of the entire situation. You have to trust some source short of being there in person and even then you would be confined to a small area. I don't think I am the one who judgment is being clouded by preconceived notions or ideology. Really I a true conservation with libertarian tendencies but this is not conservatism just a woke and cancel culture is not true liberalism.

I don't see the observer (human I presume) interaction or measurement as being any different than all the interactions that are occurring all the time in nature. Why would they be?
We agree on the way our minds structure and interpret reality for us, we disagree on to what degree we create reality external to our minds (seemingly consequential for you, for me just an effect on our understanding fairly trivial as to its effect on the external world itself)..

Yes. Obviously. This is not a serious discussion if you think otherwise. This seals it: — AmadeusD

I agree with that since we cannot even agree on the facts much less the solution.
This is an unfortunate aspect and common feature of our modern society and fractured media.
Have you ever been to LA, do you live in the US? Do you always think those who disagree with you are not serious or worth having a discussion with?

Excellent question. To digress, as I so often do, there's an article I refer to , Quantum mysteries dissolve if possibilities are realities, which echoes an idea spelled out by Werner Heisenberg - that quantum states exist as unrealized potentialities, 'res potentia', one of which is actualized by the measurement process. It's the idea that the unmanifested or potential reality is actualized through measurement. — Wayfarer

Big debate in quantum theory, does the measurement discern the actual property (location, momentum) or does the measurement, observation, interaction (itself) create the actual from the range of potential possibilities. I following process think of these things as events and thus think there is no exact location or property until the interaction takes place. I do not think this process however is confined to human measurement and instrumentation but that these interactions (collapses, potential to actual) are occurring all the time between events and processes thus the more seemingly concrete macro world we largely live in and observe.

28 MINS AGO
6:22 PM PDT

Judge temporarily blocks Trump administration from activating National Guard troops in LA
By Helen Jeong
The Trump administration is blocked from activating U.S. military troops in Los Angeles, a judge ruled Thursday after hearing arguments over California's request to limit the scope of the National Guard and Marines' mission in Los Angeles as demonstrations continue over immigration enforcement operations.
'
California Gov. Gavin Newsom had asked a court earlier this week to put an emergency stop to the military helping federal immigration agents, who have carried out raids in the region that led to protests over the weekend and throughout the week.

Under the ruling, the Trump administration will have to return the California National Guard to Governor Gavin Newsom.

The order will not go into effect until 12 p.m. Friday, California time, as Judge Charles Breyer ordered a stay to give the Trump administration time to appeal

.

es. Actual videos and pictures of the riots across multiple areas, which include vandalism, looting and various forms of assault.

I am unsure why you would trust an official over that. Particularly one's who aren't excatly bastions of truth and light. — AmadeusD

So video footage and pictures (the extent of which could hardly be evaluated) with respect to the overall picture. This is more reliable than the police chief of L.A. , the mayor and the governor of the state. Your are not striking me as trying to get a fair and balanced picture of the overall situation rather just confirming your preexisting bias, I'll grant you it is hard to get at the truth these days but you don't really seem to be trying very hard either. I'll trust the elected officials on the scene. I am not condoning rioting, assault or destruction of property but the actions of a few do not negate the legitimate legal and constitutional concerns of peaceful protestors and many legal and constitutional scholars.

It's funny how people thousands of years ago warned us about people like Trump. Truly there's nothing new under the sun. Regarding human behavior, that is. — RogueAI

Well, the quest for power is as old as time and a constant in historyl.
The founding fathers were very concerned about the concentration of power in any one branch of the government. I think they naively assumed that no one like trump would become president. Or if someone did he would be checked by the congress or the courts (may still happen). Impeachment was also a mechanism for removing such an individual. After recent supreme court decisions giving the executive extensive immunity, there is little risk in pushing executive power to the limit.
the founding fathers really did not envision political parties they were a little naive and idealistic..
They also went out of their way to avoid direct democracy, and limited the vote to men of education and property (those with a stake in society). They expected men of character, integrity and intelligence to serve for a period and then return to their private lives.
My view is we are way off track with two political parties, universal suffrage, fractured media and an inability to respect different points of view.
There are legitimate differences of opinion about the size and scope of government but those who disagree with us are not traitors or enemies of the state.
The congress was supposed to a deliberative body who would indiviudal vote their conscience and do what was best for the country.
Instead the party leaders tell everyone how to vote and then punish those who fail to comply. Primary them in primaries, withhold committee assignments, withhold funding, etc. Most everyone then toes the line and the government is really run by just a few individuals and the rest just wish to keep their jobs and get reelected. The best peole are declining to run for reelection or declining to run at all and who can blame them

I often think language is the thing that allows humans to engage in such abstract thought about the future and possibilities, to first imagine and then to create or bring them into reality. Other creatures clearly think, try to escape, vary their behaviors to the situation, plan for the future (store nuts for the winter0 and remember where they were put. Humans are not the only intelligent creatures but language which allows the flight of the imagination seems to be a critical feature of making the potential actual. Until potentials become actual though I wonder if they are "real" in some other metaphysical sense.

Well there are statements from the mayor and the police chief.
So I wonder where you get your more factual view of the overall situation.
I hope it is not fox news or youtube videos. Do you have some impartial source or someone on the ground.

Perhaps, perhaps notl
It is all rather remarkable though.
The religiously inclined will see telos. They do include numerous educated, intelligent and rational people so dismissing them all "as engaging in magical thinking and childish fantasy" may be a little dismissive.

AI report on the extent of violence in LA. Remember media does not sure show peracefull demonstrators only the more violent aspects.

AI report
Recent Protests (June 2025 - Immigration Enforcement):

In contrast to the historical riots, recent protests in Los Angeles regarding immigration enforcement have been described as far different in scale and primarily peaceful, though some instances of violence have occurred. Key characteristics include:

Mainly peaceful: While there have been clashes with police, arrests, and some property damage (cars set on fire, vandalism), the overall sentiment from officials and reports is that the majority of demonstrations have been peaceful.
Limited geographical scope: The protests have largely been confined to a roughly five-block stretch of downtown LA, a tiny area in the sprawling city of nearly 4 million people.
Fewer casualties and damage: Unlike the 1992 riots, no one has died, and there have been no widespread burning of homes or businesses. Damage has been minor in comparison.
Lower arrest numbers: While over 100 people have been arrested, this is a significantly lower number than the thousands arrested in past major riots.
Differing government response: While the National Guard and Marines have been deployed by federal order, local officials, including Mayor Karen Bass, have stated that the unrest is not "citywide civil unrest" and that the city has it largely handled, expressing concerns that the federal deployment might inflame the situation end of AI jreport
The media by its nature exaggerates the situation, as does the Trump government and right wring news organizations. Clearly to justify more aggressive law enforcement tactics.

Assuming as the antecedent, "if Trump violated the law," the consequent is "Hanover disagree with Trump's actions." — Hanover

The question has become, who gets to decide what the law is?
The president? The attorney general? Steven Miller?
Traditionally courts interpret the law and the executive follows and or enforces it?

, He is back by the way but now being prosecuted for a criminal offense. At least he can get a lawyer and a day in court, that's all I ask.
His removal did get a lot more coverage than his return, but there are so many other things to talk about.

Really. That's what it means to be a nation of laws. — Hanover

In a nation of laws, court rulings or judges opinions would be respected and followed until overruled on appeal or by a higher court, not really what is happening here.
The executive is following their own interpretation of the law despite legal rulings.

Is being in the country illegally a criminal or civil offense? From AI
This is a nuanced area of law in the United States, and it's easy to get confused. Here's a breakdown:

1. Unlawful Presence is Generally a Civil Offense:

"Being in the country illegally" (unlawful presence or overstaying a visa) is, by itself, generally a civil violation of immigration law, not a criminal offense. The primary consequence for this civil violation is deportation (removal) from the U.S.
This means you won't typically face jail time or a criminal record just for being unlawfully present.
2. However, Certain Actions Related to Unlawful Presence ARE Criminal Offenses:

This is where the confusion often arises. While simply being present without authorization is civil, the way someone enters or re-enters, or other actions, can be criminal:

Illegal Entry (8 U.S.C. § 1325): Entering the U.S. without inspection by an immigration officer, or by making false representations to gain entry, is a criminal offense.
First offense: Typically a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or up to six months in prison.
Subsequent offenses: Can be treated as felonies, carrying penalties of up to two years in prison.

Civil vs. Criminal Immigration System:

Civil Immigration Proceedings: These take place in immigration courts and deal with issues like deportation (removal). Individuals in these proceedings do not have the same constitutional rights as criminal defendants (e.g., the right to a court-appointed attorney if they cannot afford one).
Criminal Prosecutions: These take place in federal criminal courts. If someone is charged with a criminal immigration offense (like illegal entry or re-entry), they have the full range of constitutional rights afforded to criminal defendants. END AI

Note criminal offenders are supposed to have legal rights and due process. Have to admit I was not aware of all the nuances.l

They do, but this was the platform Trump ran under. Elections have consequences. It is the will of the people. — Hanover

The majority of Americans do not seem to approve of the methods being employed.
I wish I thought the majority of voters did indeed pay close attention to a candidates platform.
Unfortunately, I think they do not.
Everyone is for arresting and deporting murderers, rapists, thieves and the like.
They are not so wild about having their gardener, maid, employee or neighbor deported
Again, enforcing the law is one thing, the methods currently being employed is another.

Not from the future - from the possible, from the realm of possibility. Today's techno-industrial culture is able to 'peer into the realm of the possible' and bring back things, like LLMs, that could scarcely have been conceived of until we actually started to use them. And where, precisely, does 'the possible but not actual' exist, if not in the mind? — Wayfarer

Just being provocation. Plato's forms I believe were supposed to be more real that the shadows we gaze at in the cave. Whiteheads eternal objects are (potential but not actual). For some theists all possibilities exist in the mind of God. What value do you place on the potential versus the actual?

Nope, US law has no such provisions. Europe is much more advanced in the area of human rights in that respect.

Which is that there aren't many people who are reasonable on that side of this (this, of course, being a total generalization but it is based on far more than my experience personally). — AmadeusD

The vast majority of protestors are peaceful. The news shows only those looting, or throwing objects, or burning waymo cars. Entirely reasonable people have serious objections to the methods and process being used by Trump. You don't respond to lack of due process or the invocation of laws intended for other purposes.
Typically law enforcement wears badges, name tags or at least badge numbers, dresses clearly to identify themselves and their agency, presents identification on request and uses warrants.
Most Americans are law and order people.
Your profile indicates you are an attorney. Following the law, enforcing the law all legitimate goals.
We don't generally say the ends justifies the means when enforcing the law, we follow procedures.

Is that just talk to make us feel good, or are those words to live by? — RogueAI

Unfortunately it is often just talk. The history of immigration in the US is mixed. First it was the English Protestants against the Irish Catholics (try gangs of New York). Then it was the English and Irish against the Western Europeans, followed by those groups against the Eastern Europeans. Not to mention the treatment of Indigenous people, Mexicans in the Southwest present long before it became US territory largely through armed conquest. Try the Asian Exclusion Act or the Immigration laws from the 1920 with quotas by country and race (take a close look at which countries have high and low quotas). Then there are those brought into the country as slaves and their descendants.

There are an estimated 10 million people in the country without legal immigration status, maybe more. The process of finding all those individuals and deporting them will completely disrupt the economy and require methods which disregard legal safeguards and human rights considerations.

I haven't had a single reasonable conversation with someone who supports the riots yet. They just lie about it being peaceful and pretend it has something to do with "No one is illegal". Yes they fucking are. — AmadeusD

Well reasonable people don't support riots. They do support free speech, peaceful protest and due legal process. Not being whisked away by masked agents and deported to foreign prisons or countries other than country of origin without any form of legal due process.

Properly understood being in the country illegally is a civil not a criminal offense. There are many laws which are not uniformly enforced. I am not really objecting to enforcing the law as much as the methods and means which are being utilized.
Invoking the 1798 Alien Enemies Act which is clearly intended for war, true insurrection or rebellion
Ignoring the Posse Comitatus of of 1878 which restricts the use of US military for civilian policing except in times of emergency, invasion, insurrection or war.
There are procedures and methods for removing illegal aliens.
There are historic precedents, norms, customs and values which are being ignored.
I fear this is about more than enforcing law, it is a test of norms, checks and balances and a trial run for remaining in power indefinitely..

This government is ignoring the law. It is invoking these acts designed for true emergencies, insurrections, rebellions and wars precisely to avoid having to afford these people their rights under customary law.

It is somewhat alarming to watch a President with clear authoritarian impulses and who previously attempted to overturn the results of a democratic election invoke emergency powers under rarely used statures intended for true insurrection, invasion, war or other threats national security and integrity.

Perhaps even more alarming is the acquiescence of the congress both house and senate in allowing this historical power grab to go unchecked and largely unchallenged. The congress can determine that no such invasion or insurrection is happening and help restore historical checks and balances on an executive which clearly intends to push any checks and boundaries to the limit.

The supreme court (another check and balance) has already assured that the president cannot be charged with a crime for these acts (extensive executive immunity) and also seems willing to allow the executive to violate historic norms.

We have ICE agents wearing masks, without names or numbers, often not in uniform, with no agency identification who refuse to show identification or warrants accosting people (largely on the basis of not being white Europeans) on the streets, at hospitals, at schools and at houses of worship.

We have US Marines (trained for combat not civilian policing) deployed on the streets of L.A. against the wished of both the state government and local policing officials.

No one condones violent attacks on federal agents or police or the wanton destruction of property and looting of stores.

No one objects to detaining, arresting and deporting violent criminals, murderers or rapists. That is not what is being done. Instead deportations quotas are being issued and authorities are under pressure from the executive to meet them using any means possible.

Law abiding immigrants who have married American citizens, have children who are us citizens are being deported, often without due process, to foreign prisons, to countries from which they did not come.
Foreign students and researchers are being arrested and detained for weeks and months merely for political speech. This is a violation of human rights and international law and norms.

Yes, countries need to control their borders and yes countries have a right to know who is in the country but the current government is seriously unrestrained and out of control.

What will happen when an election is cancelled under emergency powers due to a manufactured emergency or invasion. Any subsequent protests could be suppressed using active duty US military forces. This is all a potential precursor and testing of the limits of executive power and the weakness of the constitution in certain areas is being clear. This is a clear and present danger.

The meaning of absolute space (independent of events) or of absolute time (independent of events) escapes me and many philosophers and physicists.

Newton thought of space like an rigid empty box into which events and matter were placed.
Einstein modified space into a deformable box more like a trampoline or sponge, deformable by matter.

Without events (in a completely empty universe) what would the meaning of space be?
Without events in relations to each other how would we measure, experience or conceive of space?

ust as toddlers "find meaning" in (naming, talking to) stuffed animals – magical thinking. — 180 Proof

I understand that you might think a lot of religion is "magical thinking". I wondered if you felt the same about concepts like truth, justice, beauty, etc)? I hope not.

If 'divinity' is real, why believe in it (e.g. mother, gravity & numbers are real)?

Or if (we) believe in it, why also need 'divinity' to (seem) real? — 180 Proof

Which seems to raise the question what is "real".
We seem to believe in a lot of things which are not empirically demonstrable (love, truth, beauty, goodness). It is in such beliefs (or faith) that we find meaning?

What reason would we have to believe in a deity if not believing in revelation? Sure, first cause and all that but that doesn't necessarily entail divinity let alone personal divinity.

Anyway this is somewhat tangential to the point I had been making which had more to do with motivation than justification. — Janus

For many, the divine (deity seems a little anthropomorphic) reveals itself not by supernatural means but through the self organizing processes of nature (pantheism or panentheism depending on particulars).
The seeming striving against entropy, chaos, the void, the deep for novelty, organization, complexity, experience and creative advance.

The motivation for religion and many other human activities would seem to the search for meaning (Victor Frankel) for some larger purpose or significance. Religion is not the only solution but culturally and historically it seems to be an important significant one. Religion does not have to consist of supernatural intervention, special revelation sacred scripture or the personification of good and evil although it often does.

The opening post requested more sophisticated and philosophical conceptions of God. The term "God" is strongly associated with the big O's, with personification of deity, which sacred scripture, miracles and supernatural interventions, with an afterlife and final judgement (the triumph of good over evil and divine justice and judgement). These do not seem the most sophisticated or philosophical views about the divine, the sacred, the holy the numinous.

Does anybody really support mind-independent reality? The question in the opening post?
"does the moon still exist when not being observed?" part of the Einstein/Bohr debate
The answer as lawyers would say "it depends" on how one defines the meaning of the words and concepts.

Is the reality that we observe and experience, Mind independent, probably not. For our experience of the word is filtered through our senses and organized into patterns by our brains. Our picture or representation of reality is good enough for our survival and our procreation which evolutionarily is all that is required. Other creatures can see wavelengths we can not and hear frequencies we can not because such capabilities enhance their survival and procreation. Their picture of the world is different from ours so one could say they experience a reality different from ours, but probably better stated they experience "reality" in a different way (avoiding a certain ambiguity of language)..

All of this is pretty basic science and physiology of perception along with neuroscience and cognition. Arguing whether our experience of the world is direct or indirect,, mind independent or mind created in some ways seems beside the point, as long as you understand cognition and perception.

What is the nature of reality apart from us or apart from our mind and experience. That seems like the question of noumena versus phenomena and arguments rage about to what degree our experienced reality corresponds to any external reality. Kant would argue we can know very little about the noumena. Modern science especially with the aid of instruments and technology would seem to argue we can know quite a lot, and our ability to manipulate and alter the world would seem to agree.

Do our mathematical formulas, and concepts like electrons, bosons, muons and fundamental forces really reveal "reality, the noumena" to us as it is? Yes and No, the only conceivable disagreement being to what extent. To think that our language, models and formulas are completely accurate representations is the fallacy of misplaced concreteness (A.N.W.) To deny that there is any reality apart from our experience or perception of it seems well silly, foolish and dangerous and no one actually lives as though it were true.

QM would seem to argue that there are no particles with specific properties (position, momentum, etc.) there are only fields with fuzzy distributions of energy which condense under conditions of interaction, measurement and observation. Of course the world is a continuous process of interactions and observations so reality is not so fuzzy as all that on a macro scale.

A lot of this stems from what A.N.W would call the artificial bifurcation of nature. Where we designate our ideas about external reality as the real and all of our experiences and thoughts as mere physic additions (primary and secondary qualities). We cannot and should not remove ourselves from our picture of the world. Our minds, experiences and thoughts are as much a part of nature (maybe more so) than our conceptions of electrons and electromagnetic radiation.

the rising number of the young who classify their sex and gender as neutral and sexual orientation as pan indicates their is some truth to your concerns.

On the other hand there are trua differences in sexual differentiation and there are true individuals with profound gender dysphoria. That is why such individuals should receive evaluation and treatment at centers with experienced professionals and receive guidance and care there.

You are "free" to chose, it is just not your "conscious awareness" that is making most of the choices instead the subconscious (organism as a whole) seems to be doing most of the choosing and the "consciousness is informed later and tries to take the credit.

Perhaps neither time or space are ontologically primary. Space is just a relationship between events and time (and duration) are just the formation and perishing of events. So the process philosophers would tell us and some interpretations of Quantum would not contradict.