Happy 10th anniversary, folks. :wink: — javi2541997

[God] is a moral concept ... — Constance

If “God” is a moral concept, then its worth must be judged by the moral outcomes it inspires. A concept that sanctifies fear, tribalism, or subservience fails on its own moral grounds. — Truth Seeker

Whether “God” is a phenomenological boundary-concept or an anthropomorphic myth, the question remains: What does belief in this fiction do to sentient beings? Does it cultivate compassion, or sanctify domination? — Truth Seeker

Please, can you give me a salient example where a decision has been made on good or evil that is not based on political expediency. — Pieter R van Wyk

It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God – but to [build it]. — Arthur C. Clarke

Not the TRUE reality. — Copernicus

'religion & science' are non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA) — 180 Proof

Some TPF posters are offended by my unorthodox views, but most accept a bit of oddity as typical of independent thinkers.
— Gnomon

Not always offended, but puzzled that you would be resistant to learning of the philosophers and scientists already saying much the same thing in a more nailed down fashion. — apokrisis

... Or one can go the "independent" route which at best can only end up with you repeating the semi-obvious in a suitably obscure way.

My current "research" is mostly Googling names and terms I'm not familiar with .... so the philosophical inferences are my own amateur musings — Gnomon

Somebody is doing it wrong. — T Clark

I'm wondering what it would take for a universal morality to be achieved, or if it's even possible. — ProtagoranSocratist

One of my goals is to read Copleston's entire works on the history of philosophy ...

A transman is a 'male who expresses with female gender'. A transwoman is 'a male who expresses with male gender'.

So are transwomen women? Are transwomen men? No. The terms man and woman indicate a person's age and sex, not gender. Are transwomen men who act with a female gender? Yes. Are transmen women who act with a male gender? Yes. — Philosophim

I think the point is that you can’t let your guard down anywhere, and you never could. — praxis

I avoid reading lengthy and didactic posts which are often poorly written. The AI stuff I’ve seen often seems peculiarly worded and difficult to read. — Tom Storm

I come here to listen to what others think and discuss ideas with them, not with chatbots. — Janus

↪Mijin The so-called “hard problem” of consciousness must first be characterized properly, because it contains two fundamental category errors.

The first is the one already mentioned: it conflates two descriptive levels — the physical and the semantic — and then asks how one could possibly “give rise” to the other. This question is not profound; it is ill-posed.

The second is subtler: it assumes that mind must arise from matter, when in fact it arises from life.
If you reduce a physical system, you end up with particles.
If you reduce a living system, you end up with autocatalytic organization — the self-maintaining network of chemical reactions that became enclosed by a membrane and thus capable of internal coherence.
That is the true basis of life: the emergence of a causal core within recursive, self-referential processes. — Wolfgang

From there, consciousness can be understood evolutionarily, not metaphysically.
At the neurophysiological level, one might say that in associative cortical areas, sensory inputs converge and integrate into dynamic wholes.
Through recursive feedback between higher and lower regions, the system begins to form something like a mirror of itself.
When these integrated representations are re-projected onto the body map, they generate what we call feeling — the system’s own state becoming part of its model of the world.

In that sense, consciousness is not something added to matter, nor an inexplicable emergence; it is the self-reflection of an autocatalytic system that has become complex enough to model its own internal causality.

Of course, this is not a “solution” to the hard problem in the usual sense — because no such final solution exists.
But it offers a neurophysiological direction that might lead toward a satisfactory description:
not a metaphysical bridge between mind and matter, but a consistent account of how recursive, life-based systems can generate the conditions under which experience becomes possible.

But you think consciousness is real.
— bert1

I hear people talking about it all the time. Just not very meaningfully. And certainly not at all scientifically — apokrisis

A possible conceptual distinction does not entail real separation. — Janus

“That which exists is not the same as existence itself.” (ST I, q.3, a.4) — Colo Millz

And what is so wrong with atheism? — ProtagoranSocratist

The problem is avoided with agnosticism ...

Oh I almost forgot, neither of those links answered the question or had anything to really add to it. — Darkneos

I have tended to describe myself as a methodological naturalist and not a metaphysical naturalist. — Tom Storm

What is reality?

... philosophers can't agree on reality. — Darkneos

... deciding how we choose to spend whatever time we have. — 180 Proof

I like 180 Proof answer - dancing. Just force yourself to act joyous, listening to a favorite jam, and gratitude and laughter follow. — Fire Ologist

What matters most, it seems to me, is deciding how we choose to spend whatever time we have.
— 180 Proof

Yep, and we choose to spend it right here. — Hanover

Yeah, but you don't ask how we got upon the ship.

It often seems we only realize the true value of something after it's lost. But is there a way to consciously experience gratitude, recognition, and sober appreciation without having to go through loss? — Astorre

That's generally the main issue I hear people talk about with philosophy, it doesn't really enhance our lives. — Darkneos