The now has no duration. So anything that exists in time (diachronically) must have both a past and a future.

Matter continuing doesn't have to do with conscious existence continuing. — TiredThinker

You might be surprised to hear that there are schools of thought that do not concur with your belief.

Facts are truths about something, an event, an object, people, so on. When they're discovered, they become knowledge. Facts are independent of a knower, knowledge, on the other hand, is not. — TheMadFool

Maybe independent of any specific knower, but not of being known or knowledge in general. I think that is how Peirce would describe the relation.

To me, they seem essentially synonymous or mutually dependent terms, maybe corresponding to the noesis-noema relationship.

Technology as a symbol of evil and its role in the total destruction of our world is a fairly appealing narrative. And Back to Eden solutions have long been popular. Technology seems to magnify all that is terrible about humans - from pesticides to nuclear bombs, chemical weapons to plastic bags and climate change. It can be argued that technology has robbed the world of its charm, displaced people of their jobs and suggested an apocalyptic future for us that is even more horrifying than religious end times. We don't need a theorised position to understand this. — Tom Storm

Yes, all of this.

If you think of knowledge from a holistic perspective, it seems self-evident that our economically-driven societies have over-emphasized technical knowledge at the expense of moral and social. Until we are able to catch up in these other dimensions of knowledge, technology may indeed pose more dangers than it offers benefits. This I would say is the underlying motive.

Everyone has a metaphysics after all, even if they dislike it. — Manuel

Yes, as does science, implicitly. That is the gist.

Nothing is absolutely created or destroyed, it only changes form.

When a star explodes, its atoms continue, and their trajectory reflects and continues that of the star, including the added effects from the event of its demise. In fact, if you view the star as a gravitational phenomenon from far enough away, it has a very similar profile before it has actually ignited and after it explodes.

Is the multiverse science fiction only? Sabina seems to think so. — TiredThinker

As I mentioned in another thread, I see the multiverse concept as indicative of the emergence of a new scientific paradigm, coinciding with the increasing reliance of science on modeling and simulations. Which relates to the attempt to study/quantify/contextualize phenomena at an ever-increasing level of systemic-complexity. It would fit with what Popper calls a metaphysical research program.

More on point

[The metaphysics of science is] the philosophical study of the general metaphysical notions that are applied in all our scientific disciplines....This modal suggestion, that the metaphysics of science is an investigation of the metaphysical preconditions of science, has rather a Kantian flavour. But arguably, the idea that certain metaphysical phenomena are necessary for science was present in ancient thinking, as we will now see.

What is the metaphysics of science, Mumford & Tigby

If metaphysics (qua ontology) is the science of being, then it must have universal relevance. Frankly, there are a lot of terminological niceties in philosophy that give rise to a great variety of competing interpretations. The fact that this is so means that anyone who argues vehemently from some terminological standpoint (such as propositional logic) is really only appealing to lack of consensus as an authority.

The relationship between metaphysical research programs and scientific theories is pretty complex, I'll give you that.

This looks interesting, but it's pretty lengthy. I've only skimmed it.

Criticism and the methodology of Scientific Research Programs

Haven't a clue. It's Greek to me. — jgill

Maybe it's Magick.

Math is intriguing.
Did you know that quite recently, scientists were able to create an entirely new phase state of matter that resists quantum decoherence by bombarding atoms in a quantum computer with a laser pulse sequence based on Fibonnaci numbers? Now that is math for you, try explaining that!
New phase of matter

Also, in a sense the machine becomes part of a model/simulation consisting of the measurable and the potential measurements....

An experiment is performed. A machine registers the outcome. This is when the "collapse" occurs. An hour later a scientist reads the measurement - his reading doesn't mystically create an answer. — jgill

Inasmuch as the machine was created and deployed by human intention, I don't think this successfully detaches the observer from the event, do you? It's definitely interesting.

The role of measurement, perhaps. — jgill

Can you amplify this?

You don't make a case for "science as metaphysics" – besides, the phrase seems incoherent insofar as the latter consists of categorical statements (ideas) and the former hypothetical propositions (explanations). :chin: — 180 Proof

This seems a gross oversimplification that does justice to neither.

You must be a very empathetic and generous person to put yourself in this position. It amazes me that the people with very limited resources are often so much more generous and kind than those with much and to spare.

I would hope to have the courage to continue to offer my support (in your place) and achieve the best outcome before suffering personal setback, but I can't honestly say I would do. I am glad there are people like you in the world, it is undoubtedly a better place because. If I were the person deciding to evict you I certainly wouldn't do that, even if that meant problems for me. Could you dialog with your housing agency to try and pre-empt that problem?

Magister Ludi
by Hermann Hesse

I think that the problem should be approached at the more general level of corporate accountability. Dramatically increase the scope of government to regulate corporate actions in anything that pertains to immediate social welfare - negative environmental impacts (externalized costs), cost of necessities (food, shelter). Then better regulation of the internet - insofar as that is a product of corporate interests - is just one more step in the right direction.

Knowledge and Human Interests
by Jürgen Habermas

maybe is the reason that we are always living in the present. — Persain

Yes. As I like to think of it, it is never not now.

I'm sure your descriptions match the inspiration of pantheists throughout time. Somehow, being born to awareness in any now links you to awareness in all nows.

If you undertake a dream journal, and thoroughly and regularly document your dreams, your dreams will grow in extent and clarity (at least your recollection thereof), and you will naturally achieve lucid dreaming. I have done it, the results are quite remarkable.

Critique of Instrumental Reason
by Max Horkheimer

Silas Marner: The Weaver of Raveloe
by George Eliot

The Warden
by Anthony Trollope

What does it mean to give oneself purpose? — TiredThinker

Extending one's concerns beyond the limitations of the self. We are fundamentally social beings. Being stranded on an island of self-indulgent thoughts and actions can only lead to isolation. Believing that our actions contribute to an overall good, on the other hand, can be very rewarding in and of itself.

:up:

It was attributed to me by Pantagruel. — ArielAssante

It was never attributed to you, it was made by me, Agent Smith misread the post, which was clear enough.

And, FYI, mindfulness is not a new idea but is, in fact, one of the core principles and techniques of Buddhism.

Accuracy is so important, isn't it? In fact....mindfulness. Wow.

Living mindfully. :rofl:

I think mindfulness is the optimum state of mind.

Various theories of karma have in common that they view karma as a feedback loop, — baker

:up: :up:

Bottom line, when we get all of our ducks in row, at least temporarily, there can be a “feeling” of being ‘without any kind of internal or external deception or equivocation’. That is a very powerful incentive not to delve further and most people do not. — ArielAssante

So our ducks can never really be in a row?

I just went in to our local library and offered my technical and other skills as a volunteer, so I'll be doing that in the coming year too.

haven't read Weber but I learned a little about Calvinism in history. One aspect which I do think comes into play is the context of values related to the basic economic structure of social life. — Jack Cummins

As you mention social life, there is also the whole competing sociological traditions of Rousseau and Hobbes to consider in this context. Society as separating man from his fundamental goodness versus society as the source of order, controlling man's destructive and selfish urges.

Karma presupposes supernatural record keeping and judgment. — creativesoul

Why can it not simply be natural cause and effect? Very few (if any) actions absolutely terminate in their intended consequences. Anything you do continues on, past, and through what you intend.

Interesting. If you would like to read about the idea of the "calling" it was important in Calvinism, where it reached a very material form. Weber looks at it closely in the third chapter ofProtestantism and the Spirit of Capitalism.

How can it be considered as "true"? As opposed or compared to what? False, fake, divided, imagined, idealized? — Alkis Piskas

Yes, I'd agree with this. If your true self is in bad faith, that is still your true self. Maybe what @Jack Cummins is describing is the best self?

Academic writing aside, where the term is (I won't say arbitrarily but) specifically defined, I think that ego is a pretty nebulous concept, and, in my opinion, not the best one to use, for that reason. If ego is going to be used in the (most common) negative sense, it indicates an overinvolvement of self at the expense of other and often truth. Then I would say it is just self-deception and self-aggrandizement. On the other hand, if it means the sum total of what takes place at the conscious level (ala Freud) then really, it is just synonymous with consciousness (I would personally unite id/ego/superego under that heading). I'm just not sure it is a productive term.

Or it may mean your ego* is completely satisfied. — ArielAssante

If living in accord with the constraints of external reality without any kind of internal or external deception or equivocation is egoistic. In the pejorative context you suggest, doesn't ego usually imply some kind of falsity or error?

I think that you have already answered your own question: authenticity. This is both an intuitively and comprehensively satisfying concept. If your thoughts and actions are in perfect accord, then you live authentically, and in so doing, can be said to be your true self. Of course, there are innumerable twists and turns to being actually able to do this. Self-knowledge, self-deception, knowledge in general. Still, it would be my chosen port of embarkation.

I don't think it's a problem when scientists do philosophy, only when they conflate philosophy and science.

Fermi's paradox is an example of trying to force an explanation on a description. In a quantitative study of abiogenesis, it was observed that, rather than the 90 or so precursor elements being randomly distributed among a large number of seed sites (of artificial membranes) some seed sites contained zero elements whereas a small number contained all the elements to produce biotic chemicals from prebiotic. Although the statistical probability of abiogenesis occurring in the context of the experiment was infinitesimally small, it did in fact occur.

So it is an observable feature of nature that its stochastic nature seems to break down or be superseded by more localized or focal effects where life (or perhaps negentropy itself) is concerned. Which makes sense, insamuch as negentropy is really a contradiction of the most basic law governing mechanics.

Keep the Aspidistra Flying
by George Orwell