• Evidence of Consciousness Surviving the Body
    Thank you. :yawn:

    just dogmatism, mere dogmatism.Pantagruel
    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/918584

    Straight-forward, relevant questions are beyond you. Gotcha, Pants. Just checking.

    How do you know (i.e. corroborate) that you or any other agent is "conscious" if "consciousness" is completely, inaccessibly subjective?
    — 180 Proof

    cogito, ergo sum
    Wayfarer
    :sweat: :lol: :rofl:

    Neither thinking nor existing (individually or jointly) equals "consciousness"; besides, Descartes' slogan (epitaph) is a non sequitur, sir.
  • Evidence of Consciousness Surviving the Body
    The issue with consciousness, is that you must first be a conscious agent to create or provide any kind of explanation.Wayfarer
    (a) How do you know (i.e. corroborate) that you or any other agent is "conscious" if "consciousness" is completely, inaccessibly subjective? :chin:

    (b) And if neither you nor any agent can know (i.e. corroborate) that you, herself or any other agent is "conscious," then on what grounds do you conclude, without vicious circularity, that "any kind of explanation" requires "that you must be a conscious agent"?

    (c1) So, in principle, it is impossible for a future, non-conscious AGI-system "agent to create or provide any kind of explanation"?

    (c2) And if it does "explain" anything, then, by your reasoning, Wayfarer, that would be evidence the AGI-system is a "conscious agent" (affirming the consequent be damned)?

    Most of what people tell us about their sensory experiences is trustworthy...Sam26
    The first paragraph in your post, sir, is riddled with special pleading, appeal to incredulity & appeal to popularity, and also jejune folk psychology. C'mon, how about some philosophizing sans the fallacies & pseudo-science. :roll:

    Life is largely anecdotal [sophistry].Pantagruel
    Yeah, like your posts ... care to try again?

    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/918584
  • Is the real world fair and just?
    Science has no trouble depicting the world as it was before the evolution of h.sapiens, for instance - an empirical fact -Wayfarer
    And that suffices, the rest is derivative (pace Kant) or superfluous. A more cogent and parsimonious description is, imo, more or less this one: "observers" are any aspects of the world interacting with – abstracting stochastic patterns from – any other aspects of the world.
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    Biden was not removed by lawful means.fishfry
    Which law was broken?
  • Is the real world fair and just?
    What there is (i.e. the view from any where): the world¹ and true statements about the world¹; all the rest consist in abstractions, fictions, fallacies, confusions, illusions and affects.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commons [1]

    Philosophy should be about how best to live. Whatever does not inform that, however interesting and creative it might be, is just a diversion in the form of speculation.Janus
    :up: :up:

    The precise point Schrodinger was making with Schrodinger's Cat.Wayfarer
    :roll: Schrödinger proposed this thought-experiment only to show that the 'Copenhagen interpretation' of quantum mechanics is, at best, paradoxical (i.e. does not make sense).

    ???
  • Is the real world fair and just?
    :up:

    ... perhaps unrealistic Idealism is not too far off the mark. But I prefer the unfamiliar term Enformationism, which has no history of philosophical [cogency or self-consistency] politics to elicit incredulity and knee-jerk reactions.Gnomon
    :sparkle: :eyes: :lol:

    :rofl:

    Notice I said "live in the world", NOT the world itself.schopenhauer1
    Yeah, and then you draw an unwarranted conclusion about "the world itself" as if the living are the world's victims. Stop shifting goal posts and admit you've been caught poorly reasoning again (e.g. category mistake of "world as perpetrator of unfairness and injustice").
  • Is the real world fair and just?
    Dude, "the world" is not an intentional agent so it cannot be "unfair" or "unjust". Stop whining about your category mistake, for fuck's sake, and get on with playing the cards you were dealt as well as you can – get on with living and thriving – or die trying (as per e.g. Laozi, Epicurus, Epictetus, Pyrrho, Montaigne, Spinoza ...) :death: :flower:

    :up: :up:
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    NOS4A2
    And you're happy to let Americans live however they like. :up:
    frank
    :smirk:

    I am outraged that people are given power based on race and gender, yes.NOS4A2
    We agree for once, NOS. Here in America we've been "outraged" about that since 1619 ... 1701 ... 1787 ... (1791-1804) ... 1857 ... 1896 ... 1954 ... 1963 ... and now in 2024 this "outrage" may culminate again (like 2008) in another (merely symbolic?) step up and forward out of America's white male caste system. TBD.
  • Simplest - The minimum possible building blocks of a universe
    Logic doesn't work by the principles of logic.Treatid
    :lol: STFD
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    You are not a serious person.AmadeusD
    Coming from you, lil troll, I wear your grunt like a badge of honor. :up:
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    I waa a courtroom prosecutor ... I took on perpetrators of all kind: predators who abused women, fraudsters who ripped-off consumers, cheaters who broke the rules for their own gain. So hear me when I say, I know Donald Trump's type. — VPOTUS Kamala Harris (D-CA)


    It ain't no laughing matter to beat this senile fat fascist Clown, yet already I love her happy warrior's laugh. Roevember is coming! :victory: :lol:
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    :sweat: More fatuously hypocritcal projection. I love it, dude.
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    I'm not a member of the Democratic Party and I never have been.

    I do not care one bit whether or not the party organization or its nominating primary process is democratic.

    I only care that the Democratic Party is as ruthless, disciplined and united going forward to victory in Roevember 2024 as it was in 2020.

    I don't care how they engineered ("forced" "bullied") POTUS to step aside ("palace coup"?) so long as the outcome is a candidate to replace him who can curb stomp The MAGA Cult Clown to Electoral College defeat in just over a hundred days.

    In the UK, the Tories were just given their worse electoral beating in two centuries. In France, the right-wingnut populists were defeated by a concerted unity of centrist and leftist parties. The US Democratic Party with moderate independents and "Never Trump" suburban college-educated Republicans together, can do the same thoroughly rejecting the neofascist MAGA-GOP again just like 2020.

    THIS ELECTION IS NOW ABOUT TRUMP, LIKE 2020, AND NO LONGER ABOUT BIDEN. :clap:

    VPOTUS Harris isn't my first choice by a long shot, but I am confident that with a well-funded, united coalition and superior ground game (especially in the SWING STATES), aided and abetted by the deranged, angry-whining babbling bilge of bullshit The MAGA Cult Clown will continue to senilely spew and sputter this fall after Labor Day when the other 80% of the potental electorate will finally be paying attention, VP Harris (or whomever the nominee is) will win the 2024 election. Civil unrest by MAGA brownshirts & GOP shitheads notwithstanding. :fire: :mask:

    Roevember is coming! :victory:
  • Is the real world fair and just?
    But few here would remember Landru Guide UsBanno
    An old sparring partner ... :smirk:
  • The Suffering of the World
    ... my point is that you are AWARE of counterfactuals and you CHOSE this one (whatever else might be the case surrounding this decision).schopenhauer1
    Since my being "AWARE" is post hoc confabulation, I "CHOSE" before I became "AWARE" (as Libet's experiments¹, etc show) that I have "CHOSEN" (e.g. from prior "counterfactual" – imagined – options), therefore any "decision" is (mostly) unconscious² as I point out here without raising the concept of "determinism" (which is your strawman, schop1, not mine).

    .https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6024487/ [1]

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_effect_(psychology) [2]
  • The essence of religion
    I simply ask, what IS it that is beyond oneself?Constance
    Self itself.
  • Is the real world fair and just?
    There are various systems of paraconsistent logic that accomodate or mitigate explosive results, so I won't rule out some form of dialectic, but I won't rule it in, either. (see what I did there...?)Banno
    :smirk:
    .
  • Is the real world fair and just?
    But it remains that the sort of contradiction seen in dialectic is not the sort of contradiction found in formal logic. What a dialectic contradiction is remains, I think, ambiguous.

    And secondly, even if we supose that dialectic does not breach non-contradiction, the result is not clear. Given the Principle of Explosion, anything could follow from a contradiction, so given a thesis and an antithesis, the nature of the resulting synthesis is far from fixed.

    So I would rather not glorify dialectic by calling it a "logic".
    Banno
    :up: :up:

    Indeed, what we know is mental, but that does not imply that the world is mental...

    The argument attempts to show that the world is partially mental, but only succeeded in showing that the what we say about the world is "mental".

    That is, the argument presented here does not demonstrate it's conclusion.
    Banno
    :100:

    Yes, it's the idealist (antirealist) conflation of epistemology ("what I/we know") and ontology ("all there is") – i.e. a fly-bottle out of which @Wayfarer @Gnomon et al can't seem to find the way.
  • Israel killing civilians in Gaza and the West Bank
    The "formatting" helps you illiterati read and maybe even comprehend the post. Btw, you're welcome.
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    21July24

    Well, if Harris winds up the nominee ...

    :lol: :up:

    Roevember is coming!
  • The Most Logical Religious Path
    Does it matter what the primary function of religious thinking is?Igitur
    Yes, and afaik it's this ...
    [H]istory amply shows, imo, that 'religion' is required only (or at least mostly) for herding sheep, prophets making profits and sanguinary propitiating/martyring/scapegoating.180 Proof
    ergo
    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/919316
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    FWIW, my guess (preference) of prospective nominees to emerge out of the Dems Convention shitshow next month:

    1. VP Harris-Gov Whitmer (likely)

    2. Gov Whitmer-Sen Warnock (less likely)

    3. Gov Whitmer-Gov Newsom (very unlikely)

    Nevertheless, MAGAts – Roevember is coming! :party:
  • The Most Logical Religious Path
    [T]here is truth to be found and that the person is willing to find it.Igitur
    Terror management (re: mortality) via reality-denial (i.e. fact-free, consoling myths & fairytales) seems the primary function of religious magical thinking (i.e. woo-woo), not "to find truth".
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    21July24

    1968 redux? (re: VP Humphery loses to gaslighting "silent majority, law & order, peace candidate" former VP Nixon) :brow:

    https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/21/biden-drops-out-election-00169980

    from 2023 ...
    Yeah, in 2024 that "1 way to lose" will be the same as 2016: HRC. The Dems don't learn new tricks often ... though maybe VP Harris :yikes: (if Biden drops out of the race and the Dems don't nominate e.g. Gov Newsom, Gov Whitmer, et al) – HRC redux.180 Proof

    "Defeat from the jaws of victory?" TBD.

    edit:

    also from 2023 (if & when POTUS drops out) ...
    Whitmer for President with running-mate Newsom for Veep works just as well for me too – maybe even better!180 Proof
  • The Most Logical Religious Path
    For a hundred or so millennia many thoughtful persons have lived, thrived & died without 'being religious'. Given that eusocial living sustainably with nature alone suffices for being human, history amply shows, imo, that 'religion' is required only (or at least mostly) for herding sheep, prophets making profits and sanguinary propitiating/martyring/scapegoating.

    NB: raised and educated in Roman Catholicism, I became a freethinker, then a naturalist (i.e. anti-supernaturalist inspired by e.g. Epicurus, Spinoza) and also a pandeist some decades ago: almost five decades later, I'm still fascinated, amused and horrified by historical 'religion' both in theory & practice.
  • Is the real world fair and just?
    [@Wayfarer] wants his cake and to eat it.Banno
    :zip:
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    Trump never should be the nominee but the GOP has been shit since Reagan.Benkei
    :up:
  • Is the real world fair and just?
    It’s not a question of whether the ‘wave function’ is or isn’t mind-dependent.Wayfarer
    :roll:
  • Is the real world fair and just?
    Do you assume that 'the wavefunction' itself is mind-independent¹ (whether it 'collapses' (Copenhagen) or not (Everett))?

    Do you assume that 'the wavefunction' is mind-dependent² (whether 'mind' is intersubjective (community of observers/instruments) or divine (deity))?

    Do you assume something else?


    [1] or subject/pov/language/gauge-invariant
    [2] or subject/pov/language/gauge-variant
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    :up: Apologies for the oversight.
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    19July24

    Interesting. :chin:

    Like 2020, don't vote for the man (or the woman); vote for the mission in Roevember 2024 which is to defeat The Neofascist Crininal Clown & his rabid MAGA junta-in-waiting. :victory: :mask:

    Informed, intelligent commentary is welcome:
    @Mikie @Wayfarer @Benkei @jgill @ssu @frank @jorndoe @Mr Bee @RogueAI @tim wood
  • Simplest - The minimum possible building blocks of a universe
    :ok: If there is no objective truth, then your statement "there is no objective truth" is, at most, merely a subjective affectation – self-refuting vaporware like the cheapest after shave.
  • Questioning reality at a young age?
    Has anyone else here had a sense that what they were experiencing in early life wasn't truly real or that it was highly stripped down?TiredThinker
    I grew up before wall-to-wall vidiocracy of 24/7/365 cable tv, video games, smart phones, social media & youtubing, so definitely not because my "early life" was "truly real" for me, especially as @Vera Mont so rightly points out, nature (i.e. wilderness – through which I, a fortunate though working class NYC kid, had often backpacked & hiked since early grade school).