Woke, like beauty and pornography, is in the eye of the beholder.

Jimmy Kimmel's show suspension over the comments he made about about Charlie Kirk's death, and all the other people fired over comments about Kirk's death shows the state of free speech in America.

I did a little research and it turns out this is considered an example of mathematical beauty. It is called Euler's identity and is valued as a connection between the most fundamental numbers in mathematics expressed within it.
It has three arithmetic operations appearing once each (addition, multiplication and exponentiation), and
involves five fundamental mathematical constants (additive identity, multiplicative identity, pi, Euler's number [e], and imaginary numbers). Some mathematicians call it the most famous formula in mathematics.
Good first attempt.

P.S. it's used to prove that pi is transcendental (I know, esoteric math, beyond algebra and calculus).

What exactly is the phenomenon that metaphysics is addressing? If it’s something like the surprise that there is something rather than nothing, why should we treat that surprise as indicating a real problem? — Banno

I agree that surprise of the existence of something rather than nothing doesn't indicate a problem. In my view, the root phenomenon that metaphysics is addressing is the unknown answer to a physics question. In the early days of the universe, after the Big Bang, and cosmic inflation, there was a plasma phase that evolved into the creation of atoms, during which matter and antimatter came into existence. They weren't equally balanced and matter eventually overcame antimatter. Since they were created at the same time from the same source, they should have been equal, which would have meant the universe would be empty of all matter. (matter + antimatter = no matter + energy) Metaphysics, along with physics, is trying to interpret the initial imbalance since it allowed the creation of what we have now. Physics is looking in one direction, metaphysics is looking in a different direction.

If you say, the world is created by your mind, I feel your world is likely to be very much in illusion. A perceived world sounds more accurate. — Corvus

Just out of curiosity, what is the difference between a person's created world and a person's perceived world?

My god means to me that I should see myself in everyone, and accept that all I see in others is also inside of me. My god means to me that I should accept responsibility for everything being exactly as it is, as it is a part of me whether I've been active or passive in its creation.

Nonsense. "Nothing" necessarily cannot "exist". — 180 Proof

I agree. Using nothing as a concept to denote no thing in the state of existing, creates the existence of "state", which can be no thing or some thing. I'm just using existence as a label (perhaps confusingly) as part of my depictions of concepts about the existence of "things" or not the existence of "things".

When God is described as the Ground of Being, this typically means that God is the fundamental reality or underlying source from which all things emerge. — Tom Storm

Let me tell y'all about my god (who's still around, by the way).

I go with the theory that once upon a time, nothing existed. Then all of a sudden, something came into existence. Whatever entity caused the creation of existence is my god. Since nothing existed, my god had to use itself for materials/energies to create with, so I am literally a part of my god. If you go with the Big Bang theory, a few hundred million years after the universe started, at the end of the hot plasma phase, the first OG atom, hydrogen, was created. Those hydrogen atoms are still in existence since they don't die. Those billions of years old hydrogen atoms are within our bodies today. We are physically linked to our universe's origin.

In this case "intelligent" or "ignorant" are labels describing the effect of a decision, not a value judgement; intelligent=contribute to survival, and ignorant=contribute to perishing; evolutionary movement is always in the now.
To use AI for example, decisions about AI are being made in the now. Some of those decisions may help homo sapiens survive, and some of those decisions may be dangerous to survival. In this example, in each now, there are uncountable decisions being made all over the earth by homo sapiens on how to interact with this new environmental element. The evolutionary movement here is the accumulation of all of these decisions, both "intelligent" and "ignorant" over time, and the changes between homo sapiens and everything else in their environment as they incorporate the new environmental element of AI into their existence. This incorporation could be beneficial, detrimental, or be "not a big deal" to homo sapiens existence.
All of us are part of this evolutionary movement of incorporating AI into our existence, as we make our own decisions on how to interact or not interact, or are unknowingly interacting with AI.

I agree with the thought, "I don't think that good is synonymous with, "something one ought to do".
I think "good" is doing what gives you positive energy. Generally, you don't get positive energy from killing and stealing and whatnot, we're kinda hardwired that way.

Can I say it? Can I say it? AI may make all of this moot. (lol)

Most living organisms on earth, other than the dinosaurs and the ones we're getting rid of, either adapt to their environment and survive, or maladapt and perish.
Homo sapiens will also either adapt to their deteriorating environment, or their numbers will start being reduced, as we're seeing in declining child bearing rates.
It doesn't matter who or what gets the praise or the blame, homo sapiens will either show evolutionary intelligence or evolutionary ignorance.
All of us are part of this evolutionary movement in deciding intelligent or ignorant responses.

God is a third party, of which is the source of goodness, which was and cannot be the offended nor offender. — Bob Ross

The God that would condemn you to eternal punishment after giving you free will to do whatever you want to do is a hypocrite. If God wanted you not to do anything objectionable, why give you the ability to do objectionable things? Is it a test? Is God using his creations for entertainment, like watching TV? If we are all a part of God, why would God condemn a part of itself to eternal punishment?

There are a lot of "awakenings" on the horizon. The American government is helping to make the world "woke" in the original political/economic definition of the word. The US did an important thing to help Europe and Asia recover after WWII. I believe it helped stall further lower level conflicts in a war-shredded world where the powerful could've created empires to rival anything in history. The US was an enabler in the economic growth of the world. Unfortunately they were an enabler too long, which is not healthy for either party in the relationship.
The US is ripping off the band-aid, so to speak, that covered the other war-torn parts of the world after their injury from that global war. It would've been nice if it could have been done more gradually, but I believe doing it gradually would have been negotiated into doing the least amount to keep everyone happy.
In the formation of whatever comes next, past globalization of economic production will have an effect on whatever new alliances are created. Most nations will not antagonize other nations upon whose goods they depend on. Whichever nations build up their self-sufficiency in this new world will be able to determine their own fates. The ones that do it better will be more in control of their situation in the world.
And yes, it will be more expensive, for everyone.

Howz bout dis'...if it ain't yer original thought, or yo' original thought about somebody else's thought, don't post?

Belief is thought. Belief is an expression of self.

I agree that thought in the now is the reality. The certainty of thought in the now is embedded in the experience of self. You can be 100% certain that whatever thought is going through your mind in this now is an accurate reflection of who and what you are in this now, as thought is part of your experience of your self (even if based on a hallucination). In the next now, your memory of your thought in the previous now could be inaccurate, but your experience of thought in the current now is never inaccurate. Even if your senses are all messed up and inaccurate, your thoughts are giving you an accurate experience of your messed up senses. You can be uncertain about your senses, but never be uncertain about your thoughts - they are what you are. Your thoughts are consciousness of self in relation to everything else.

Americans Are Unified In Wanting A Better Life

In American life, a better life often involves compromise. Developing good skills in compromising will lead to a better life. Over three hundred million Americans used their lived experiences to decide our country’s political future. No matter what percentage of Americans actually voted, their families and friends make up 100% of America. I encourage us to respect ourselves.
Every two years we get to choose what kind of country we are.
Respect that.
Many countries do not get that chance.

To me religions are procedures about worshipping a god; how to please it as well as you can. Religions comfort those who are suffering, not those who aren't suffering. I would think that suffering would be mentioned heavily in religious literature and thought. A lot of religions offer paths through suffering for people who're lost, with prayers and acts of kindness and forgiveness. I'm not religious, but if I was a gangster, I'd go with the Catholics. I could whack someone on Friday, go to confession on Saturday, receive Holy Communion on Sunday, and if someone whacked me on Monday, I'd go to Heaven. I could cause suffering, be forgiven, suffer myself, and finally receive the reward of Heaven. What a deal!

Two New Infinities Discovered

Here's an introduction to the exacting infinity and the ultra-exacting infinity.

New Scientist described exacting cardinals as being so large that they contain copies of themselves—sort of like a house with many full-scale copies of itself inside. Ultra-exacting copies additionally include mathematical rules on how to create them “as if the nested house was also wallpapered with blueprints of itself.”

George Washington's Farewell Address (1796)

The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.

Yes. In Lao Tse's time, there was no formal discipline of empirical Science. So philosophers and sages relied upon Intuition (look inward), Contemplation (observe together), or Meditation (mindful attention) to construct models of how the world works. Such practices might produce superficial (poetic) insights into how the Tao works, but subjective knowledge only becomes common knowledge when shared as objective & technical information : i.e. Science. — Gnomon

The lived experiences of agrian life, woven into the soil, air, water, plants and animals with which humans existed, was their "science".

In this American political era, whoever has the best story (fiction or non-fiction) wins. Period. Facts, other than who's giving the most money to who, are irrelevant in politics. In 2020, the story of the overbearing rich taking advantage of middle America won. In 2024, the story of overbearing liberal progressives destroying America won.

I see American politics turning more into a team sport, where if you're calling yourself an "x" then you support these people and these positions (whether you agree or not) in a show of team loyalty; and to be a "y" you have to support these other people and other policies.

Sport modeling isn't good for govening. Sports are "winner take all" modalities. Governments are designed to be "make as many people able to basically live" as reasonably (politically) possible modalities.

The only serious commitment to successful governance is the commitment to insure children are raised with accurate enough knowledge, and true feelings of support during their growth period, to create better governance in their maturity through having the capacity, and willingness, to honestly consider more than one or two viewpoints in their decision making.

I do not talk smack (however fun it is) about the other side because we each looked at the situation and made our honest decisions. In the "sport" of politics, someone has to win and someone has to lose.

People think they live in a democracy because they hear the word used. Yet everywhere they look is evidence that their most cherished institutions are nothing but toys for plutocrats. Is this truly how people think democracy should work? — Pantagruel

In this American political era, whoever has the best story (fiction or non-fiction) wins. Period. Facts, other than who's giving the most money to who, are irrelevant in politics. In 2020, the story of the overbearing rich taking advantage of middle America won. In 2024, the story of overbearing liberal progressives destroying America won.

My ideal Democracy requires educated voters who know basics about the workings of their government, not just figureheads telling people what to think about the workings of their government. Democracy that requires educated voters because whoever is in the majority in a democracy can become a tyrant to whoever is in the minority. Democracy that requires people educated enough to respect others as equal, even those in the political minority, and be able to show true consideration.

My understanding is that even in ancient Greece, everyone didn't vote. Those who were eligible to vote met almost weekly to make laws and foreign policy. Only men 18 years or older could vote, so if you were away in the military or had to tend your farm or do any work that didn't allow you to be in Athens, you didn't participate in their democracy either.

Any grouping of homo sapiens with a governing structure is going to result in a small percentage doing the actual governing and the rest just trying to live their lives. Doesn't matter what you call that small percentage, what matters is under what principles does everyone allow those few to run things.

People don't actually care until they get a boot on their face and they cry out "how did this happen!?" — Christoffer

By that time it's too late, cuz the half of the population that's getting paid to put a boot in someone's face are figuring they made the smart move and the ones getting a boot in the face are the dummies. It's too late cuz by then, enough people have been bought.

I'm of the view that due to the American mentality, and the fact of there being more guns in this country than people, fifty years from now central US government authority will either break down and we'll literally return to medieval state-level feudal authority, or the central government will have to go full martial law. I do not see a sensible resolution due to corporate greed (they won't know when to stop; and for global corporations, they'll lose their fat American goose but there are plenty other geese to eat [AI will make it more efficient]).

Do you think it's possible to record the individual human experience?

By that I mean, what each of us go through every second of our lives? The inputs to our senses, the thoughts that pass by, the emotions we feel? — Ayush Jain

There was a syfy movie 20 or 30 years ago where criminals would commit crimes and record everything going on in their head (their feelings and visions and sounds etc) while committing them and then sell the tapes to rich people to sit in their living rooms and relive it.

Not possible yet, but if you record continuous brain scans and use AI to segment out the signals from each your five senses, it may be possible to record, but accurate playback would be impossible except for in the brain that originally recorded it. Thoughts would remain unrecorded and emotions would have to be strong enough to produce a brain sensed physiological effect to get recorded.

Usually they are people who prefer to be alone than constantly around others. — Rob J Kennedy

I don't know why people pursue philosophy, just like I don't know why anyone pursues any career. The preference of being alone I might be able to give you an amusing example of. I'm an OG, so back in the day our vehicles had carburetors. I was trying for the first time in my life to clean one, which involved taking it completely apart. To reassemble it, the parts had to go back in a specific order. On this glorius day, after I'd prettey much got it all apart and was ready to move on, several of my friends dropped by and I got pulled away from the task at hand. When I eventually came back I had no clue to the proper order of reassembly and wound up having to buy another carburetor.

If you've been on a thought for awhile; if it's out there and you're following along (which can take some time) solitude is a blessing.

The movie "Tuesday" is the most unusual depiction of Death I've ever seen.

Hope I don't misrepresent it.

The philosophical answer for everyone is, "be as you are until you decide to be something else".

The followup is: if you're happy on your path, maintain it; if not, seek change.

It will be entertaining to see if he whups MAGA into submission or if MAGA eats him and moves on.

I see this discussion as highlighting Trump the person. I see Trump as symptomatic of the control of our political system by large corporations. I see Trump as merely the latest entertainer. Would Trump have even made it without Musk's $250 million donation? Even if Kamala would've gotten elected it would have been financed by corporate billionaires. I didn't vote for him but I'm not going to condemn my fellow Americans for voting for him. Something is wrong with the other side if a person like him can get elected. Plus, corporations don't care about the content of anyone's character, they care about who's going to help them make the most money. Whatever Trump does or doesn't do, the one thing I guarantee is that large corporations who kiss his ring are going to make record profits. Along with the political slogan, "it's the economy stupid", goes another very relevant slogan, "follow the money".

I have a question about this discussion. Once Trump is installed and has put his incompetent but loyal staff in place, there will be countless opportunities to critique their screwups. Will we be allowed to fan out on this duscussion thread to discuss all the chaos the incompetent ones will be generating or must we focus only on Trump?

The coming together of singularity I'm currently seeing is of corporations trying for singular control of their industry and billionaires seeking singular control of their government. What am I missing?

As an OG (old guy) I look at it this way: some things are beyond my understanding because I choose to let those things drift off. I don't have the energy or desire to stay on top of all the changes going on. Thirty years from now (whether I'm alive or not), I would choose a child born today (1/1/25) to organize policy on artificial intelligence over a person who is seventy years old. When I was a young guy, I had the energy and time to scope out the latest and greatest, and I was doing my daily living within the new technologies and was able to handle them well enough to get what I needed/wanted. For new generations, they are embedded in whatever technology and social mores they grow up in, becoming fluent in them.

Part of the process of aging is letting go of some things and holding on tighter to others, depending on your priorities. OGs should just sit back and admire, or be aghast, at the new stuff coming out, realizing that each successive generation has to try to create the world they choose to live in. Some things OGs like or dislike will disappear, and some new things they like or dislike will appear.

Since life being static is sometimes associated with death, getting to the point where the world is unrecognizable could be considered a sign of new life coming forth.

Is brightness a static, intrinsic property of the sun? — Mapping the Medium

No. Brightness is a value judgement based on an organism's evaluation of the electromagnetic energies emanating from the sun. The emitting of energy is the intrinsic property of the sun. How that energy is interpreted depends on the interpreter.

I see sweetness and beauty, when used to describe something, as value judgements. Value judgements are analog; measures of fructose or glucose are specific and digital. Sometimes there is relevant correspondence between analog notation points and digital ones, and sometimes there isn't.

Sorry, to answer your question, in this example I don't think sweetness is a static property of honey.

What would an ethical policy toward Syria look like? — BC

Allow as many of the people of Syria as possible to answer the question, "Right now, today, what would be of the most help to you?". And whatever they answer, help them get it.

It's logically impossible for existence to be created. — Relativist

You're absolutely, positively undisputedly correct...yet existence is created everyday. Just depends on what existence you're talking about. It's kinda a philosophical thing and a laboratory thing. Both the scientist and the philosopher are trying to get past the "Big Bang". Personally, I think the three or four or whatever dimensions we exist in don't allow for that revelation. Both the philosopher and the scientist will be speculating on that without any "proof" as long as we exist (if we can agree we exist - lol).

My understanding is that one of the new occupations created by AI is the position of an AI Prompt Engineer, whose purpose is to construct a query that gets a company a useful answer from AI.

To paraphrase a scene from "The Graduate"

God: I just want to say one word to you. Just one word.

Me: Yes, sir.

God: Are you listening?

Me: Yes, I am.

God: Fractals.