If we apply the PSR from the point of view of the abstract realm, no need for particulars, so no particulars. — jkg20
That which emanates these cosmic ideas/forms, as in its sapient analog, i.e. us, is more like how one's imaginative mind conceives of a language, or even a poem -- it is an entirely cognitive event. — snowleopard
That is the philosophy of Vijñānavāda, translated as 'mind-only Buddhism' which forms a major part of the monastic curriculum in Tibetan, Chinese and Japanese schools of Buddhism. It is considered a very advanced subject of study. — Wayfarer
even before being inclined to interpret and articulate them in terms of Idealism. — snowleopard
Thought contents are true and bear their relations to one another (and presumably to what they are about) independently of anyone's thinking these thought contents - "just as a planet, even before anyone saw it, was in interaction with other planets." '
Gödel was a mathematical realist, a Platonist. He believed that what makes mathematics true is that it's descriptive—not of empirical reality, of course, but of an abstract reality. Mathematical intuition is something analogous to a kind of sense perception. In his essay "What Is Cantor's Continuum Hypothesis?", Gödel wrote that we're not seeing things that just happen to be true, we're seeing things that must be true. The world of abstract entities is a necessary world—that's why we can deduce our descriptions of it through pure reason. — Rebecca Goldstein
when we do think about maths, for instance, when we consider whether some function is a derivate of another function, does the distinction between thought contents and mathematical objects dissolve? — jkg20
Just because Causal Processes can happen over time doesn't mean you don't need a C Realm. Any Causal Process of the C Realm must deal with Physical Realm Activity and translate that to Conscious Realm Activity. Maybe these Causal Processes are in Realm A and Realm B but somehow a Bridge between Realm A and B must be constructed. — SteveKlinko
As I explained above, the "Bridge", which is realm C is not necessary. The realm C is only required to prove a causal relation. Realm A and realm B be may be causally interactive without any realm C. The so-called "Bridge" is just needed to understand the causal relation. However, since understanding is already a property of the one realm, let's say realm A, the Bridge would be entirely within realm A, principles of understanding, and not a real bridge, nor a realm C, at all.
This is the real problem of consciousness. We assume a material, physical, world, a realm which is outside the realm of consciousness. But we have no real way to understand it because everything which we understand is within the realm of consciousness. So we poke and prod at this material world, observing how it behaves in response, but we can only make conclusions based on a supposed causal relation, because we haven't discovered any real Bridge. There may not actually be a Bridge, and any constructed Bridge would just be within realm A, and only a false Bridge — Metaphysician Undercover
If we can all agree that there are at least the two distinct Realms, Physical and Conscious, then we need to understand how things that happen in the Physical Realm can cause things to happen in the Conscious Realm. — SteveKlinko
If we can all agree that there are at least the two distinct Realms, Physical and Conscious, then we need to understand how things that happen in the Physical Realm can cause things to happen in the Conscious Realm. — SteveKlinko
The best approach, I find, is to reverse this position, and look at how things in the conscious realm cause things in the physical realm. The evidence of a temporal priority is much clearer this way, and we can proceed toward understanding this priority through concepts such as final cause and free will. — Metaphysician Undercover
This is awkward for me since I'm secretly a determinist with a predilection for bottom-up explanation wherever possible (Occam's razor etc.). Yet, no Zombies for me! — Kym
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.