Of course this is so ... sub specie aeternitatis.Well, Spinoza's Natura Naturata would be cover both the 'vacuum' and the 'atoms', the union of them (also, according to him, the attributes are independent from each other, so emergentism is not compatible with Spinoza). — boundless
If not conditionally "deterministic" (i.e. constrained by your (my) nonlinear dynamic, ecology-nested, embodied cognition), then what makes any "choices" yours (mine)?For instance, if a compatibilist argues that my choices are 'free' because they do not have 'external' causes but they are still deterministic, I fail to see how this can be true 'freedom ...
What exactly is explained by "a mind behind the universe"?I'm trying to point out that a mind behind the universe is the best explanation ... — Sam26
Secular mysticism redux.Despite materialism and postmodern deconstruction, NeoPlatonism is making a resurgence. What is the significance of this? — Jack Cummins
The latter are messages – signal-to-noise ratios – and the former is a medium.What is language and its connections to symbolic forms of interpretation?
Yes.Are ideas mind-dependent, subjective, objective or intersubjective
constructs in human semantics?
16August24 – $23.06 per share :down:NASDAQ (DJT) :rofl:
26March24 – $57.99 per share
(NASDAQ 16,315.70)
15April24 – $26.61 per share :down:
(NASDAQ 15,885.02) — 180 Proof
Stop with the strawman, schop. My counter argument emphasizes the followingThe Nietzschean emphasis ... — schopenhauer1
as I've pointed out in my previous post which your (& T. Ligotti's) special pleading evades. To wit:As daoists, epicureans, pyrrhonists, spinozists, absurdists et al know first-hand: humor & creativity, friendship & compassion also provide "relief" during the often tedious intervals between "sleep and death". — 180 Proof
there are philosophies of defiance ("unselfing") such as those mentioned above contrary to sophistries of denial ("suicide") like fideism, anti-natalism or nihilism. :mask: — 180 Proof
Yeah, like e.g. "anti-natalism" (i.e. destroying the village (h. sapiens) in order to save the village (h. sapiens)) – I agree, schop. After all, "suffering" isn't a "problem to solve" but rather an exigent signal to adapt one's (our) way of life to reality by preventing foreseeable and reducing imminent disvalue/s. :fire:Creating a false narrative cannot solve the problem of suffering. — schopenhauer1
I.e. if we are more like droplets of spray from a wave of the ocean (or rays of sunlight from the sun) than e.g. passengers riding on a moving train...Still my question is: how can we have some degree of autonomy if we are not separate from the Whole? — boundless
For Spinoza, no doubt an "inadequate idea" (i.e. imaginary, illusory) sub specie aeternitatis.Even the 'co-determination' of some actualities ... something like Tolkien's concept of subcreation, in a sense.
Yes, because sub species aeternitatis Spinoza's immanent-monist (unbounded, self-organizing vacuum field-like) metaphysics is acosmist and your "pan-en-deistic" whatever, Gnomon, implies an unparsimonious, transcendent-dualist (Pythagorean / Neoplatonist / Leibnizean / panpsychist monadic-like) metaphysics.it is Deistic ... specifically PanEnDeistic.
Would Spinoza disagree? — Gnomon
Neither claiming nor implying such, how does "heroism" equate to "masking the reality" when a hero is usually someone who defies reality, fatally risking herself, rather than someone who denies reality? :chin:Masking the reality with heroism — schopenhauer1
No "existential gaslighting" or "performative resiliance" – the fact is, schop, there are philosophies of defiance ("unselfing") such as those mentioned above contrary to sophistries of denial ("suicide") like fideism, anti-natalism or nihilism. :mask:At the end of the day, there is no relief, only sleep and death. Everything else is MALIGNANTLY USELESS...
— schopenhauer1
As daoists, epicureans, pyrrhonists, spinozists, absurdists et al know first-hand: humor & creativity, friendship & compassion also provide "relief" during the often tedious intervals between "sleep and death". — 180 Proof
Absolutely. The indispensible virtue. With courage, cheerful-defiant pessimism (e.g. Nietzsche); without courage, resentful-defeatist pessimism (e.g. Schopenhauer) – singing the blues :death: :flower: or crippling anxiety :cry: :sad: , respectively.Yes. Do you think this requires a type of courage? — Tom Storm
As daoists, epicureans, pyrrhonists, spinozists, absurdists et al know first-hand: humor & creativity, friendship & compassion also provide "relief" during the often tedious intervals between "sleep and death".At the end of the day, there is no relief, only sleep and death. Everything else is MALIGNANTLY USELESS ... — schopenhauer1
:up:Consciousness surviving the body? If you are dualist, perhaps. — Manuel
Not so. Consider ...You can find the oldest record of moral rules in the Torah and the Quran. — Tarskian
IFF, imo, it's a post-scarcity, philanthropic AGI-managed (automated), sprawl-free municipality (arcology) ... ideally, an O'Neill/McKendree cylinder (asteroid terrarium). :nerd:Is A Utopian Society Possible? — kindred
Probably rabid domestic terrorists ...So then I'm wondering what will the Trump cult morph into next? — Benkei
You're entitled to "believe" whatever you like but these "beliefs" are not supported by either corroborable evidence or valid arguments. You're merely rationalizing, not reasoning – preaching, not philosophizing. We don't even disagree, Chet; we're playing different games, talking past one another.(I believe)
The belief is all I have.
I am only really speaking of order and chaos as emotions ...
I would say that COMMON sense shows this is very true.
My belief is that the entire universe has as a rule ...
... the seemingly ephemeral 'thoughts and prayers' all have an effect.
... my model of belief suggests ... — Chet Hawkins
No they aren't. For example, dying is not life's goal, only life's direction; thus, it's incoherent (or "disingenuous") to conflate them.the philosophical difference between 'direction' and 'goal' is rather disingenuous ... The terms are effectively synonymous.
Stalinism & Maoism, like Nazism/Fascism, were totalitarian theocratic-gangster systems wherein dehumanizing means undermined, or eliminated, humanizing ends. Nothing to do with indigenous communisms (or libertarian socialism).What are your thoughts on the matter? — Shawn
Parsimony be damned, the principle of explosion (& effect of other "obvious" fallacies) always ... works in mysterious ways. :pray:The obvious implication of my argument is that there’s intelligence (consciousness or mind) behind the universe ... — Sam26
Confession is good for the soul, they say; don't you feel better now, Sam? :smirk:Ifour[my] goal is to win an argument at all costs because we don’t like aparticular[valid, scary] conclusion, thenwe are[I'm] not doing good philosophy ... especially ifour[the] goal is truth.
No doubt, @Wayfarer, you accidently missed this request.And I've long argued that if an individual life is understood as part of a continuum extending before physical birth that has consequences beyond physical death, that this can provide a framework within which the life beyond is at least conceivable.
— Wayfarer
Okay, so make the case – a sound argument – for this alleged "continuum" ... Once the facts of the matter are established, then we can interpret their philosophical ramifications (and, maybe, derive cogent, metaphysical conclusions). :chin: — 180 Proof
More precisely, "spirituality" is a stance or disposition towards daily experience (like e.g. creativity) and not merely a means-to-ends "tool".Spirituality is a non-rational tool — Tarskian
Not so. "Survival instinct" is autonomic (like e.g. respiration) and therefore does need to be extrinsically "stimulated".... to stimulate survival instinct ...
I.e. metaphysics (i.e. categorical / absolute ideas) that is expressed via rational (inferential, dialectical) and/or non-rational (analogical, mythical) discursive practices.... by connecting to something that is greater than ourselves and which is divine in nature ....
Really? Tell that to Daoists, Confucists, Vedantists, Pythagoreans, Epicureans, Stoics, Neoplatonists, Aristotleans, Spinozists et al ... Each of these philosophies are manifest "spiritual" ways of life.Philosophy is not meant to do that and therefore cannot replace that.
This may be true of modern academic philosophy (e.g. Anglo-American analytical philosophy, Viennese logical positivism, Parisian post/structuralism, etc) but not true of contemporary variants on and applications of way of life philosophies (some of which I've already mentioned) such as (e.g.) rational emotive hehavioral therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, existential therapy, logotherapy, clinical philosophy, etc.Unlike spirituality, philosophyis not meant toassist with mental healthcare.
I.e. mygoddidit-of-the-gaps :sparkle:physics after thefreemiracle — AmadeusD

What do you mean by "philosophy"and "spirituality" – what makes them fundamentally different?Philosophy cannot replace spirituality. — Tarskian
:up:You will find no other philosophy so reviled, misunderstood, and scorned, yet still true.
— schopenhauer1
Hallmark belief of a religious cult. — Lionino
Yeah, of course, you"re making my point again: you traffic in slogans – strawmen – rather than informed, valid arguments. :smirk:Physicalism is, in slogan form, the thesis that everything is physical....
—Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy — Wayfarer
If so, then vote against him in the most effective way based on your situation: if you live in a swing state (i.e. polling trends are within the margin of error so that there is a reasonable chance for Trump to win your state), then vote "Harris-Walz"; if, however, you live in a safe state (i.e. Trump can't either lose or win that state), then vote for a third-party candidate who most aligns with your policy preferences (e.g. I will write-in "Cornel West" here in Washington state).There’s no way I’m voting Trump — John McMannis
