if panpsychism is true, human consciousness (probably) isn't the result of evolution. But I don't think that's likely - I don't turn my nose up at it either, but I don't think it's likely. — flannel jesus
Nevertheless something gives rise to thought, and since it is prior it is without telos — Chris Degnen
Incomplete Nature by Terrance Deacon is an interesting modern attempt to recover Aristotlean formal cause through thermodynamics and thus to explain purposeful behavior and the emergence of first person perspective. It isn't fully convincing, but it's the best effort I've seen.
One deficit it has though is that it assumes that information only exists in terms of life, as a given. To assume otherwise would be to introduce humonculi for Deacon.
I think this is mistaken. My hunch is that a satisfactory accounting of intentionality will include an explanation of the way perspective and semiotic elements of reality are "baked in" from the outset. Scott Mueller's "Asymmetry: The Foundation of Information," and Carlo Rovelli's "Helgoland," have some interesting points on this front. — Count Timothy von Icarus
I think it has utility as an aspiration, as in calling thought into action when required and resting it when not required; — Chris Degnen
I do think that will can and should be employed in both an externally realizing and internally self-restraining sense — Pantagruel
"there is a perception of a refined truth of the dimension of nothingness" — Chris Degnen
That is fine in a world of thought and things, but in an unconditioned world without (or before) thought there is no telos. — Chris Degnen
So we can actually chill-out and float upstream in a reality free of instrumentality, from time to time. — Chris Degnen
Unlike Kant, I would say that, although there must be something intuited as outside of me in order to determine myself within experience, it is entirely possible that the sensations which are given (for me to intuit) are completely or partially fabricated (by myself or another) and there is no way to know. To me, this doesn’t really matter for practical purposes, but is technically true. — Bob Ross
narrative trick of saying "you're not going to believe this but I swear it's true." — Jamal
The violent attack on Israel is far worse than the defensive reply with violence. Defense is permitted, attack is not. Killing in defense is not as bad karma as murder during an assault. — Nicholas
That being said, I think Israel should abide by its own principles in war and provide as much aide as possible to Gazans, keep its air strikes only at targets that are absolutely seen as necessary to disarm them, not just anywhere they suspect. They need to actually have a strategic plan for a two state solution and work to bolster the moderate Palestinians. — schopenhauer1
Should the Allies have bombed Nazi Germany in 1945? — schopenhauer1
Israel's treatment of the Palestinians while shocking to you appears to overlook the fact that Palestinians butchered and burnt babies, raped women, and took the very old as hostages. — Hanover
Surely, science isn't "the pursuit of truth" but "the pursuit of truth under a particular set of circumstances", and these circumstances are what we call science. — Judaka
direct usefulness means that a dog would understand it. — Vera Mont
itself having no direct usefulness — Vera Mont
Adam Smith was seriously full of shit. — Vera Mont
Religions are not life-affirming as such. — baker
Collective and cooperative efforts on a global scale are impossible. One cannot coordinate and cooperate with 100 people at once, let alone 9 billion. So I’m not sure about the reasonableness of that. — NOS4A2