• Do People Value the Truth?
    It's a survival machine. In order to survive, it [a brain] requires information; it must construct a mental model of its world.
    Vera Mont

    I think this opinion is wrong. The desire to believe, to know, and understand, is not based in what is needed to survive.
    — Metaphysician Undercover
    :lol:
  • A Case for Analytic Idealism
    Pansychism [ ... ] matter is fundamental but that matter is conscious, whereas analytic idealism is the view that mind (i.e., consciousness) is fundamental ...Bob Ross
    I see. You're advocating immaterialism (which entails solipsism), not (just) panpsychism.
  • Philosophy is for questioning religion
    Interesting how nature, once 'the created', is now imbued with the power of creating itself.Wayfarer
    Only in (primitive) 'creationist'-based cultures; however, not so according to Brahmins or Daoists (or, for that matter, either classical atomists or Spinozists) for whom nature itself is eternally naturing (à la autpoiesis).
  • A Case for Analytic Idealism
    Under analytical idealism, the entirety of reality is fundamentally mind and is thusly conscious: not just animals.Bob Ross
    Analytical Idealism is not a form of pansychism. Furthermore, could you please elaborate on why you think such?Bob Ross
    Explain why you have not just contradicted yourself, Bob. Thanks.
  • Why Monism?
    ... to hold an imaginary ...Mark Nyquist
    Okay, a step away from talk of the "immaterial" to the "imaginary" is progress. But how do you "hold an imaginary" X? A map of Middle Earth, for example, is instantiated on actual paper, but that map does not correspond to an actual place.
  • Why Monism?
    ... contained in my brain as an immaterial representation ...Mark Nyquist
    This confuses me. Please clarify how an "immaterial" Y is "contained in" a material Z.

    ↪180 Proof If you are a monist ...Mark Nyquist
    I am an emergentist (re: holism), not "monist" (dualist or pluralist).
  • A Case for Analytic Idealism
    The physical world is representation, not the thing itself.schopenhauer1
    Suppose "representation" is the "thing in itself" (just as the tip of an iceberg is also an iceberg) ...
  • Why Monism?
    You could observe me in either of these states, but you would not be able to know for sure whether I was conscious of what I was looking at, at the time.Janus
    Using proper brain scans and algorithms one could easily observe your real-time un/conscious-states.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6119943/
  • Why Monism?
    Where do you sit on the notion that maths is Platonic?Tom Storm
    Numbers are abstract objects (or structures) which are real only in so far as they are physically instantiable. I guess this view makes me more Aristotlean (hylomorphic) than Platonic-Pythagorean (supersensible).

    Would mathematical Platonism quality as immaterial?
    Yes; ergo, IMO, a fiction.
  • Name for a school of thought regarding religious diversity?
    Sure. That mis/use, however, doesn't make atheism itself a theory.
  • Why Monism?
    On the other hand, if we each know from experience that we are conscious, then it must also be observable in another sense, the difference being that this other kind of observation is not publicly confirmable.Janus
    Human babies develop a 'theory of mind' that is strongly correlated to their "publicly confirmable" observations of others' behaviors. As for one's own "consciousness", or subjectivity, I think it is only assumed and not observed (any more than an eye sees itself seeing). My "publicly confirmable" behavior strongly correlates to others' 'theory of mind' as applied to me (and one another) and, on the basis of the persistent circumstantial evidence, I don't have any observational grounds to doubt or disbelieve that I am (at least, occasionally) "conscious". Do you? As far as I'm concerned, 'eliminativism' is only a research paradigm which treats "consciousness" as a counterintuitive "user-illusion" that deconstructs the incorrigible basis – "conscious" – of our folk psychology (i.e. practical woo) in order to publicly investigate (an) objective physical structure of subjective information processing (i.e. experience).
  • A Case for Analytic Idealism
    My answer to you asking the question* would be that it is not the chemicals, but the loss of the chemicals being arranged grandma-ishly that I am mourning, because I really liked the effect of the chemicals being arranged grandma-ishly.wonderer1
    :cool: :up:
  • About Freedom of Choice
    Either there is no "free will" or there is no "God" or there is neither; therefore, there is no problem of reconciling "free will" with "God".
  • A Case for Analytic Idealism
    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
    :100: :up:

    Yes, it seems to me that 'panpsychist' arguments (e.g. analytical idealism) consist of appeal to ignorance / incredulity, hasty generalization and compositional fallacies.

    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
    :fire:

  • Name for a school of thought regarding religious diversity?
    Not theories, working assumptions (or principles). Again, atheism itself is not a "theory" because it does not explain anything.
  • Philosophy is for questioning religion
    Everything humans do is a product of culture and society, and always has been. — Jamal
    :up:
  • Deriving the Seven Deadly Sins
    IME, the only "sin" is learned helplessness that engenders repetitious self-sabotage aka stupidity.
  • Why Monism?
    Digestion is a material process which is not a material object.

    Ideas, theories and generalizations only exist insofar as they are physically instantiated.
    Janus
    :up: :up:

    To my mind, simply put, material corresponds to instantiated (observable); physical corresponds to material system (configurable); and natural corresponds to physical structure (invariant).
  • Name for a school of thought regarding religious diversity?
    Atheism, as I understand it, is the epistemic position that there aren't sufficient reasons, or grounds, to believe that the claims of theism are true or to trust in them. The main particulars:

    • There aren't any sound arguments demonstrating that the claims of any form of theism (which also includes deism) are true.

    • There aren't any publicly accessible corroborations of any "scriptural" accounts of any god or gods (or "miracles").

    • There aren't any extant, ostensible, "divine" "sacred" "spiritual" or "supernatural" facts of the matter.

    Atheism is only a sound criticism of theism and not itself a "theory of godless reality" (or a belief system).
  • Culture is critical
    I'm an absurdist bluesman (i.e. cheerful pessimist) – sláinte! Drink up, folks, 'cause its always later than you think. :party:

  • Emergence
    Do you mean 'intelligence versus self-awareness?'universeness
    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.
  • Why Monism?
    Nagel's argument that 'a philosophical construct like "subjectivity" – itself, at best, a secondary quality (re: Democritus, Galileo, Locke) – be accounted for by the natural sciences' proceeds from a category error as well as his profound misunderstanding of the epistemic status (i.e. probabilistic fallibilism via abduction) of scientific theories such as e.g. 'neo-Darwinian Evolution'.
  • The Debt Ceiling Issue
    Yeah, by next Wednesday the bill we be on Biden's desk or he will have to invoke the 14th Amendment the week after. This ain't silly shit like the Lehman Bros fiasco.

    https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/05/laurence-tribe-explains-how-14th-amendment-can-help-biden-avoid-default/
  • The Debt Ceiling Issue
    What will be the outcome?Mikie
    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.

    Of course, worse case, Biden invokes the 14th Amendment and keeps paying on US Treasuries until the constitutional crisis is litigated in SCOTUS ... sometime next year (maybe in time for the general election). No US Default -– come hell or highwater! – is my prediction.
  • Emergence
    My reference to Kahneman's work was only mentioned as scientific corroboration, not justification or proof, of my philosophical statement about a 'metacognitive processing bottleneck' (re: System 2, thinking slow aka "consciousness"). There isn't any evidence among higher mammals, including h. sapiens, that Sys 2 / conscious processing such as ours is indispensible for intelligent – adaptive problem-solving – behavior. To me it's clear that that expectation is only an anthropocentric bias. The current developmental state of 'large language models' / 'neural net machines' (e.g. ChatGPT, OpenAI, AlphaZero, etc) in still narrow ways, as far as I can discern, show that 'sapience sans sentience' is the (optimal) shape of things to come.

    Another link to the catastrophic effects of (runaway) global heating on Earth's fresh water sources: lakes & reservoirs.

    https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/18/world/disappearing-lakes-reservoirs-water-climate-intl/index.html

    The heating of oceans and drying up of lakes-reservoirs are strongly correlated. Not "pessimism", my friend, just facts. :mask:
  • About Human Morality
    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
    More an Epicurean than a Stoic? :cool: :up:
  • Philosophy is for questioning religion
    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
    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.
  • Why Monism?
    @Gnomon :roll:
    [E]xplain why, particularly in philosophy, you prioritize 'arguments with non-propositional premises' (re: mental-states (i.e. ideals)) over above 'arguments with propositional premises' (re: more-than-mental-states (i.e. concepts)).180 Proof
  • About Human Morality
    self-interested altruismTom Storm
    :up:
    If morality is ultimately a social enterprise and about cooperation and flourishing, then the idea that there is something in it for us all to be moral is possibly inescapable.Tom Storm
    :100:
  • Why Monism?


    "... voidism (Democritean / Buddhist)." ~180 Proof
  • Name for a school of thought regarding religious diversity?
    Accepting this definition of a theory, would you say that (your best interpretation of) atheism qualifies as a theory?Hallucinogen
    Not at all. Atheism is only a critique and rejection of theism.
  • Why Monism?
    More (disingenous) word-salad. :lol:
  • Why Monism?
    Why posit monism?IP060903
    My guess is that it's much easier to cope with – much more intuitive – than voidism (Democritean / Buddhist).