Well I disagree with this antirealist suggestion, Pez – "concepts" do not "change" themselves, we change our concepts in order to adapt. Turning on house lights at night in an unfamiliar house does not change the house, rather you change only your capability for orienting yourself within that unfamiliar house. Likewise, given that we inhabit the world, the 'models (i.e. pictures, maps, simulations) of the world' which we make conform with varying degrees of fidelity to the world and thereby inform our expectations of how we can adapt to the world. For instance, GR & QM were as true about the physical world in Aristotle's day and in Newton's day as they are today even though Aristotle, Newton and their contemporaries, respectively, were completely ignorant of them. Thus, changing our concepts of reality, in effect, only changes us and not reality itself.These concepts change and so does the world we live in. — Pez
As I understand it, philosophy concerns making explicit – problematizing – the "limitations of the mundane" beginning with reasoning itself (e.g. Plato, Kant) so attempts to reason-without-limitations (i.e. thinking/knowing-beyond-thinking/knowing) is, it seems to me, pseudo-philosophical nonsense (Witty) or not doing philosophy at all (e.g. religious / spiritual / therapeutic fantasy). Except maybe in poetry, IMO, there is no "beyond".I am inclined to agree [with] Pantagruel about the limitations of 'the mundane'. — Jack Cummins
We exist on a plane of immanence (Deleuze et al) that is unbounded in all directions. We are also inseparable from this plane (i.e. "the mundane"), therefore, though limited, we are not merely finite beings. :fire:It seems such a 'flat perspective'.
Aren't we all? :monkey:I may be my worst enemy here.
Play Chess or Go, Jack: the real is always "hidden" from you in plain sight on the board (i.e. "the mundane", "the surface") while you play the game (i.e. live/think). Play Jazz music or European / Indian Classical music – truth is there if you listen with both your body and your ears.However, it is also a quest for 'waking up' and looking beyond surfaces. The idea of 'hidden' may be mythical as opposed to an objective 'reality' beyond the visible.
I've witnessed this sort of "divorce" afflicting several friends and acquaintances throughout my life and always have felt fortunate that I didn't go through such "agony" because I'd realized while still at my Jesuit high school that, despite a decade or more by then of a fairly strict Catholic upbringing and education, I had had no "faith" to lose, recognizing that I didn't believe the biblical stories were any truer than the superhero comics (& Greco-Roman, Egyptian-African myths) I'd geeked-out on or that Catholic symbols & practices were anything but tribal customs like wearing team jerseys and flag waving. I can't say forty-five years later that the experience of 'coming out as a nonbeliever' (I wasn't aware of the word atheist or freethinker yet) was anything like "enlightening or triumphant" since it greatly displeased my mother, irritated both of my favorite teachers who were priests and confused my younger brother and our closest friends.I'm still not a believer in losing one's faith as being a universally enlightening or triumphant experience. Loss of faith has been one long, agonizing divorce for me. — Noble Dust
:ok:There is a leap of faith involved [ ... ] why I believe something revealed is a revelation from God: it is precisely because the story of God told in the bible makes no sense that I believe it has to be true. — Fire Ologist
:fire:It's not as if theists don't find life meaningless. I have worked in the area of suicide intervention and on balance those who find life meaningless and become suicidal are just as likely (if not more so) to believe in a god. — Tom Storm
Of course they do – their audience is a loser cult that lives to be lied to – which is good for business. Fox Noise, OAN, NewsMax, Alex Jones, RT, etc still manage to sell the "witch hunt" bs even though ALL the prosecutions' witnesses are MAGA-GOP "flying monkeys". The grift never sleeps. :mask:And yet, the Pro-Trump media continues to feed the "witch hunt" narrative. — Relativist
I don't understand what you're saying here. Please reformulate and clarify....these concepts are actually the respective world we live in and beyond our world-view and in abstraction from it there is definitely nothing left we could talk about – — Pez
I suppose my own "axis mundi" consists of the 'principle of non-contradiction (PNC) sans principle of sufficient reason (~PSR) —> universal contingency (UC)'.And we all hold confirmation biases in terms of this personal, typically implicitly maintained, axis mundi. — javra
Apparently, an Appellate-proof (restrained) judgment of over $450 million (disgorgement + interest), barred for (only) 3 years from doing business in NYS & borrowing from NYS chartered banks, an (enhanced) independent financial monitor & corporate compliance officer – straitjacket – for 3 years, but no "corporate death penalty" (yet?) ...By31Jan24the Trump Org will be effectivelydissolvedin NY State by order of Justice Engoron and no less than $300 million USD (re: "ill-gotten gains") will be disgorged as well as Fraudster-1 (maybe Beavis & Butthead too) will be barredfor lifefrom the real estate industry in NY State. NB: Liquidations to commence soon in order to put up a $300 million or more cash bond that's required by law to Appeal the civil judgment – Loser-1 clearly isn't that liquid (thanks, Ms. Carroll! :clap: :kiss: :flower: Loser-1 also has to put up a total of $88.3 million in order to Appeal both her judgements too) – otherwise, without that combined half-billion in cash (USD), the collection agencies for NYS will slap enforceable liens on all defendents' personal & real properties asap and savage tf out of them like piranha. :wink: :party: — 180 Proof
:100: :up:we want to use superveniance to explain in some way how the mental is in some way dependant on the physical
— Count Timothy von Icarus
Supervenience isn't an explanation in itself. It's more of a category. It's a way of categorising models, and the MODELS are the things that have the potential to explain. — flannel jesus
In other words, "physical laws" are invariants in the structure of physical models which attempt to explain regularities experimentally observed in the physical world. To the degree such models themselves are objective, the "physical laws" derived from them are objective.'Physical laws' are features of physical models and not the universe itself. Our physical models are stable, therefore 'physical laws' are stable. If in current scientific terms, new observations indicate that aspects of the universehave changed[differ from previous observations], then, in order to account for suchchanges[differences], we will have to reformulate our current (or conjecture new) physical models which might entail changes to current (or wholly different) "physical laws". E.g. Aristotlean teleology —> Newtonian gravity —> Einsteinian relativity —> — 180 Proof
On the contrary, mate, it's quite easy to know the impacts of emotion on thinking from lived experience (e.g. frustration, romance, intoxication, stress, trauma, etc) as well from disciplines such as cognitive neuroscience, behavioral psychology & cognitive behavioral therapy which corroborate (ancient) 'philosophies of life' both East and West.It is difficult to know to what extent emotions help or hinder in thinking. — Jack Cummins
:roll:I understand him to be making reference to Schrödinger's equation for a superpositionally dead & alive cat. — ucarr
I tend to agree with Spinoza (& e.g. the Epicureans, Stoics, Pyrrhonians), strong emotions tend to bias or block thinking, especially philosophizing, with that to which such emotions are reacting. 'Philosophies of life' usually propose exercises (e.g. meditating, caretaking, suspending judgment, flowing, being indifferent to whatever cannot be controlled, etc) for cultivating habits of equanimity, which IMO grounds courage (i.e. the skill-set for adaptively, or proactively, using – thriving from – loss, failure or uncertainty).In some ways, anger may be seen as something to be overcome emotionally, or as an idea,or frequency. How does it stand in connection with philosophical ideas and ideals of love and hatred? — Jack Cummins
I heve no idea what you mean, ucarr.a kind of metaphysical POV [ ... ] affords us a metaphysics of practice — ucarr
Deacon sounds like he's espousing what C. Rovelli aptly calls "quantum nonsense" (re: ).If quantum physicists can learn to become comfortable with the material causal consequences of the superposition of alternate, as-yet-unrealized states of matter [ ... ] the superposition of the present and the absent in our functions, meanings,
experiences, and values [ ... ] a delicate superposition of the present and the absent.
See p.1 of this thread for my exchanges with @ucarr on discussed similarities of classical atomism and "absential materialism", namely the role of absence/void as "constraint" and thereby the primary factor in emergence/atomic recombinations. As for my "attitude" toward his book: from ucarr's reflections, wiki summary & reviews, T. Deacon's thesis seems to be 'nonreductive physicalist scientism' – not philosophically interesting to me.It might be instructive to ask 180 about attitude toward Deacon's "radical" Incomplete Nature, and Absential theories. — Gnomon
