Yup. I agree. Like other things though, its something easier said than done — javra

Yes, very true and frustrating. If only we had more power! :joke: The word (logos!) can be very powerful though! :smile:

Stoic notion of universal logos. — javra

I'm not too familiar with classical philosophy, so had to look it up. And indeed:

"Stoic philosophy began with Zeno of Citium c. 300 BC, in which the logos was the active reason pervading and animating the Universe. It was conceived as material and is usually identified with God or Nature."

Makes sense! Modern science could learn a lesson about that. Or be taught a lesson! The "hard problem" of consciousness would be "solved" in a couple of lessons!

:up:

Reasons and causes are indeed closely connected. Reasons can be said teleological causes. Reasons provide clarity about personal causes.

Maybe reason and physical causation meet at the divide between the mental and physical world, at the epistemic cut, i.e., in our bodies.

A). How would we “prove” gods existence if we could only observe it through collective faith? — Benj96

The point is, we can only prove the existence of gods by private experience. Its simply to hard a feat for them to appear in the flesh, by which they would damage the natural order and cause their creation to collapse in on itself. Luckily, they took (accidentally!) care of this, and the laws of quantum mechanics offer a refined means of mindful communication, by which I mean they can show themselves via the mind. In dreams, in thoughts, in mental projections onto the great wide-open. It is possible, once one's mind contains the properly prepared soil, that it becomes more fertile to eventual divine communication.

Hope they discover something interesting! — chiknsld

Actually, they did. After a long time of collective tinkering (initiated by the delphin gods) in the planes, jungle, fields, waters, and air of heaven, they finally succeeded (well, actually they grew desparate, after initial enthusiasm, and by cheer luck the breakthrough was broken; a confused and weary philosopher god unvoluntarily did his part...), they succeeded! And they brought the stuff into being... And off went the first bang! A lot followed and still infinite are to come. Dunno if they are still bored...

The greatest moron of all is me. I wallow myself in my complete moronship and stupidity, and even my mirror image seems brighter than me. What blissful knowledge! And at least I know myself!

The guy is a computer freak
— Hillary

I wish my achievements matched my zeal! :sad: — Agent Smith

Your book will be a bestseller! Maybe we can work together for a future Nobel Prize. Fifty-fifty! :grin:

I mean, without interpunction or capitals. I just wondered how this sounds. In one breath? :grin:

Just tell me, would you throw a 100 dollar note in the river?

Enjoy — I like sushi

Thanks! :smile:

You are confused — I like sushi

Yes, because it is confusing. A euro is a coin with physical properties of money. It has a value stamped on it, an edge with words, a side with a country-dependent image in relief, etc. Pretty physical. And it has a value. It depends on who you ask if this value is intrinsic to the coin or not. Mist will say yes, in which case it's you who is confused: "How can a piece of metal have intrinsic value? It's just a circular piece of metal!" Yes, but we project an intrinsic value in it by belief. It's my guess you won't throw a golden 100 dollar piece in the river (or at my head). A stone is easily thrown though.

And even your objectivity is a belief. Yes, a coin and stone both hit me hard when thrown hard. But the very picture you paint is a subjective picture. A belief...

But in the science of physics, this order has been reversed, such that space is prior to time — Metaphysician Undercover

Space and particles moving in it is time. The emergent thermodynamic time are real particles collectively moving in irreversible processes in an emergent space, the both of which inflated into existence from a TDtime- and macro-spaceless primordial state of virtual particles rotating reversibly in a primordial embryonic space (which can be interpreted as primordial time), embedded in a higher dimensional space with appropriate properties to make the inflation and later accelerated expansion happen.

So God created people so that they could believe in him so that he could exist? — chiknsld

That's not the reason gods created the raw material for the universe. I was recently informed that the eternal divine heaven became victim of an existential void and paralyzing boredom. The only thing left to to was to collectively engage in a research program to develop the universe's fundamental ingredients and in deed create it. The life evolving after the act serves to fill the void, that so unfortunate fate.

Currency does not exist in the same way that a table or chair exists. — I like sushi

Well, it used to, but less and less. The small coin I threw down from a high balcony of an Italian holliday hotel hit a person near the pool with considerable accuracy!

Money is a material thing to exchange with. Be it a coin, paper, or ones and zeroes with a plastic card and chip or phone attached.

:lol:

We could have felt it the other way round. Effects preceding causes. It would be completely weird, but I think this is what the "fundamental problem" of the direction of time is about. What problems men have created, including wo-men! :smile:

:lol:

All together now: "PLEASE STAY, DEAR NICKERLESS, DON'T LEAVE ME STANDING IN THE RAIN..." Oops, wrong song! Ill remember! :halo:

Ah! That's the name. I thought it was a comment. My reading skills deteriorate, brother Uni... Ill take a look!

When I stand on my hands, it's you who is low. :lol:

Bruce Lee was a great panto philosopher! Looking beyond his finger directly to the opponent. It would indeed be foolish to look at his finger!

What thread?

The belief that money has value creates the reality of money. The believe becomes the non-material reality. The piece of paper stays the piece of paper, which can be considered another belief. Like the just sold Warhol (for a reasonable 195 000 000 dollar) is just a piece of underground, colors, and a nice frame, which probably costs more than the paper and colors used). What belief is projected into the Warhol?

What if we consider theologic belief? Do we project a reality or create a reality? Is there a difference with projecting onto pieces of metal and paper (or patterns of zeroes and ones)? Well, the material world itself is a belief, but it exists nevertheless. Not as in our belief, but there are objective qualities in the universe and the need larger contexts like brains to become endowed with properties emerging from visions, angles, POV's, perspectives, perceptions, etc.
Same for gods.

Oh well, I think he has gone back to digging into the dirt with his hind legs and flicking the dirt backward — universeness

A powerful image! Logic-proof! :up: (almost wanted to place a heart emoticon..., oh, what the hell... :heart: ).

Had you show me without language what you can do with money, with coins or banknotes, it would have become clear to me, without a single word, what money is. If instead, certain stones were used for money, stones would be money. Language accelerates the process of understanding.

instead of explaining why conflating politics and economic interests with Knowledge is Kindergarten Philosophy — Nickolasgaspar

Politics and economic interests and knowledge, be it scientific, theological, or astrological, can't be logically separated and evaluated according to logic rules. Only in hindsight such separation can be made and history be logically reconstructed, giving a wrong and distorted picture of the actual story that happened.

You never address or acknowledge the point made...you tap dance trying to appear as wiseguys.... — Nickolasgaspar

Wiseguys? No way! We're the PantoTap Duo!

Dropping a fission bomb on a city full of citizens is no good!

"idiotic thinking", "you complete fool!", "Your dimwitted judgment", "you are a dishonest person", "are hilarious BEPO", "your own dishonesty", "your skewed projections", "Yes dimwit!", "your own dishonesty and imbecilic interpretations", "brain fog you suffer from", etc.

Now I know you are reversing the bullet (and his linguistic bullet carries way more contempt than yours!) but don't lower yourself to that boring, pseudo-logical, imbecillic, BEPO dimwit talk of that moronic gasbag! A single hole in the bag suffices! Psjsssshshsh.....

What humans perceive are just physical entities and their motions and changes. — Corvus

Precisely! But don't they perceive time then?

Language is fun! When the Berliner meets the Hamburger, the battle of the tastes takes off!

Lets me help you, it's not 'suppor' its 'support'. It's not 'say soldier's lives,' it's 'save soldiers lives.' — universeness

Wanted to write exactly the same! Heigh vife, broother Uni!

In fact (contrary to what I thought first), you can apply probabilities with zero verified samples. I'm 99.9% sure you are a terrible PITA lacking the basics of intelligence. I haven't seen one verified example of the contrary! :lol:

You're the best! :smile: (it almost brings a tear to my eye!)
And way above the "evanhellicals" we both have an aversion of!

Yes, trek means journey, pull, or appetite. Three meanings of one word! You know more words with three such diverse meanings? Or are pull and journey related (pulling of a horse during a trek by chart).

Good to hear! — Janus

Big buzz! :smile:

The wave flushed over me and yet I succeed. No contradiction in the negation, and hence not a necessary proposition. — Banno

:up:

So "trek" just means journey, like in Star Trek? Trek is a Dutch word too. "Vogel trek" means the great journey of the birds to warmer regions. Oddly it can also mean lust to eat.
Strange that I never saw Satan in Santa! There are many of these word "coincidences", like evil and devil.

I am agree with you. — javi2541997

I love your English (no offense!). :grin:

Well, I take it she does so in jest as she married you! — universeness

Yeah, for sure. And she's right!

.thinks he can criticize me or Dillahunty
— Nickolasgaspar

Matt Dillahunty is a skilled debater. You are not. Now you type like a pathetic diva! — universeness

Where the fuck did you criticize MD? Nickerless might be a "high class" logician, but his reading skills are indeed that of a pathetic diva! :lol: (pathetic diva's are funny though).

Without a past we can't live the present, in my quite humble opinion. It's very difficult (if not impossible) to experience the present without involving the past.

It deserves to be considered for. But not so deeply because you cannot modify what happened previously... — javi2541997

I only read one year old papers. Makes me feel I'm ahead of my time...

Physical cause is not the same as logical necessity, but it sure is a logical necessity.

"The wave flushed over me and physically caused me to fall"
"The wave flushed over me and logically necessitated me to fall"

Draw your conclusion.

It is not even worthy at all. — javi2541997

Well, that depends on the past. And because time can only be experienced by looking and remembering the past, it deserves a revisit.