:100: :up:There is a logical leap from our being experiential to the universe being experiential. We have no experience of the experience of the universe or of it being experiential. It seems to be a form of anthropomorphism. — Fooloso4
:fire:We have no experience of something fundamental. That there must be something fundamental is merely an assumption that rests fundamentally on our desire that the universe to be intelligible to us. — Fooloso4
:fire:We have, however, made considerable progress in explaining things physically. The claim that things are experience (esse est percipi?) does not explain anything. — Fooloso4
:up:Everything humans do is a product of culture and society, and always has been. — Jamal
:up: :up:Digestion is a material process which is not a material object.
Ideas, theories and generalizations only exist insofar as they are physically instantiated. — Janus
No. I mean intelligence (i.e. adaptivity) without "consciousness" (i.e. awareness of being self-aware), a distinction I suggest in this old post https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/528794 ... and speculate on further, with respect to 'AGI', here https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/608461.Do you mean 'intelligence versus self-awareness?' — universeness
The Dems will use a parliamentary procedure with the help of several GOP congressmembers to force a vote in the House that will pass and go on to easy passage in the Senate for Biden to sign the clean debt ceiling raise into law by the first of June. McCarthy is Dead Speaker Walking –'even if he were to get everything he wants out of Biden – so both men are just engaging in political kabuki theatre in order to give Minority Leader Jeffries time to engineer the Dem's parliamentary rescue of the US Debt from the pathetic default-ransom by the GOP Insurrection Caucus.What will be the outcome? — Mikie
More an Epicurean than a Stoic? :cool: :up:In my own case, I rarely know why I do anything and have very little insight into my motivations - I'm a swirling vortex of contradictions and unconscious values and biases. Despite this I feel unreasonably content. — Tom Storm
Perhaps an aside but, IME as a born, raised and educated ex-Catholic, the distinction between orthodoxy and Ms. Armstrong's emphasis on orthopraxy lacks much of a difference in so far as in the main, ceteris paribus, religious practices and religious beliefs are strongly correlated.Most other traditions prize practice above creedal orthodoxy: Buddhists, Hindus, Confucians, Jews and Muslims would say religion is something you do
— Karen Armstrong, Metaphysical Mistake — Christoffer
Not at all. Atheism is only a critique and rejection of theism.Accepting this definition of a theory, would you say that (your best interpretation of) atheism qualifies as a theory? — Hallucinogen
My guess is that it's much easier to cope with – much more intuitive – than voidism (Democritean / Buddhist).Why posit monism? — IP060903
Nonetheless, your "tv scifi" taste is impeccable, mate! :cool:I'm not a sci fi guy, but I enjoyed Firefly/Serenity. I liked the imaginative literary ambition of the original Trek (in small doses) but later Trek seemed a bit contrived and mechanical for my taste. I remember hearing about Next Gen in 1987 and saying (quite idiotically it turns out), 'This will never catch on, Trek was an unrepeatable one off!' — Tom Storm
I disagree. I think scarcity is the source of (all) human harm and that "not having children" doesn't solve anything ...I think that creating children is the source of all human harm. — Andrew4Handel
Well, here's a post in which you use "anti-metaphysical prejudice" ...I don't remember ever making such an assertion about "anti-metaphysics". — Gnomon
At last, a confession. They say it's good for the anatta. :up:All tip and no iceberg, man — Wayfarer
A good time for you to actually study his First Philosophy which has come down to us as metaphysics. :smirk:Aristotle is enjoying a renaissance ... — Wayfarer
Well, at least we agree that materialism (e.g. classical atomism) is anti-"supernatural" (i.e. anti-woo). I prefer the Greek conception of tà metà tà physikà biblía which I'd summarized recently:The term "metaphysical" refers to concepts or principles that transcend the physical or empirical realm and are typically associated with supernatural aspects of reality (bearing in mind that the Greek-derived 'metaphysical' is a synonym for the Latin-derived 'supernatural'). — Wayfarer
... First Philosophy with respect to his Physics. The word 'metaphysics' literally means 'the book after the book on physics'. It is meant to consist of categorical generalizations about nature derived from studying the many domains and particularities of nature. In other words, one must know nature (i.e. physics) in order to understand the principles / limits of physics (i.e. metaphysics). — 180 Proof
Too anthropocentric. The universe, my friend, is extremely inimicable to complex organisms outside of their miniscule, watery envelopes of powerful magnetic fields in 'Goldlock's Zones' like Earth. Outer space is for the machines; virtual space is for (our) species. At most, we're tele-explorers (i.e. remote viewers (e.g. space telescopes, Martian rovers, Jovian probes, etc)). AGI—>ASI may be "our guardian" one day ... :nerd:There is a vast universe to explore, but can we earn the privilege to do so? — universeness
:up:What a sweet Pollyanna! — Vera Mont
Our intelligent machine descendants are emerging now from the womb of human reason. They will be either an extinction event or the apotheosis of human civilization – IMO, a profound improvement either way on the global status quo / human condition. :victory:I am bewildered that we can not achieve "the better" through reasoning. I think we are proving those of the Enlighten[ment] right, that with reason we can do better. — Athena
Yes, especially those people who understand that 'one ought to do whatever one expects will eventually benefit one.'In my opinion, people only do something if they expect it to benefit them, and not because they ought to do it. — Jacques
:fire:Much of what Hadot is talking about refers to a meditation for the purpose of dismantling biases, towards habits, passions and... religion. This is the difference between religious arguments, religious beliefs, religious thinking and... philosophy. — Christoffer
:100:If you think about all philosophical topics and arguments, they're all trying to do one thing, remove bias and fallacies from an argument in order to arrive at a conclusion that can be agreed upon. — Christoffer
So do you consider Spinoza with his counter-biased more geometrico, for instance, a "positivist"? The author of the monumental (though suppressed for centuries) Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, which had inaugurated modern biblical criticism and strongly suggested that all "revealed faiths" and "transcendent beliefs or ideals" are mere superstitions (i.e. dogmatic fairytales & fables) – by your lights, Wayf, is he just confusing metaphysics with "scientism"?The proposal you're suggesting is really like [ ... ] Spock, the Vulcan, possessed an enormous IQ and encylopedic knowledge, from a terrestrial point of view, but was often caught out by what we would now describe as his lack of EQ ... — Wayfarer
I think of 'flourishing / well-being' as the process of optimizing agency. What do I mean by 'agency'?What are your thoughts on the rather broad category of 'human flourishing' (or 'wellbeing' asSam Harrishas it)? — Tom Storm
So my conception is that we flourish as our capabilities optimize from being exercised individually and collectively (otherwise, we languish...) E.g. Peirce-Dewey influenced 'disutilitarianism' + Philippa Foot's 'natural goodness' + Martha Nussbaum's 'capabilities approach'.Agency (i.e. ethos) consists in individual and collective capabilities (i.e. adaptive habits, skills, norms-conventions, commons-affordances) of agents to help others and themselves to prevent and reduce harm to others and themselves. — 180 Proof