That's news to me. There are at leaat hundreds of threads wherein "fundamental reality" (i.e. ontology, metaphysics) is discussed. I even refer to the topic on my profile page. Use the site's search function to find those discussions and (maybe) contribute.People on the forum said it is not allowed to talk about fundamental reality... — Carlo Roosen
I seek to understand the limits of the uses, misuses & abuses of 'truth'.Are you a seeker of truth? — Carlo Roosen
Philosophy begns by reflecting on foundational questions which we do not know how to answer (yet), how to validly raise such questions without begging them and how to reformulate them ad infinitum or until they become empirically decidable (i.e. "applicable to reality"). As I understand it, the existential challenge is to adaptively make sense of reality in general and thereby strive to live accordingly. Seeking "to get answers" leads merely to (dogmatic, sophistical) religion, Carlo, and is not, imo, philosophy. You've come to the wrong site for "answers".[M]y challenge is going to be, to get answers that are applicable to reality.
This pseudo-question reminds me of silly maxims like "if man was meant to fly, he would have wings". Besides, "humanity" is a concept, sir, and not an individual who can "want". Instead of idling here like a child pondering on whether or not s/he "should want" to learn from (an) adult(s), build a "superhuman artificial intelligence" first so that then you/we can discuss with it what questions it/we should by asking.. :brow:Should humanity even want to build this SHAI?
An anti-fascist vote is NOT an endorsement for the Democratic party. — Cornel West, 2020
Deep love seems to be mutual joy inspite of rather than because of – surrender (e.g. "unselfing" ~ I. Murdoch) without idealization. (Spinoza meets Žižek) :broken:There is nothing so whole as a broken heart. — an old Rabbi
:up:The Middle East is in a perpetual war zone that benefits a big ass weapon industry. — javi2541997
:fire:"pro-life" folks ... who are also ... pro-death penalty... seek to control (reverse) demographic trends by controlling women's bodies ...
—180 Proof
Absolutely spot on! And I'm not American.
I had similar thoughts when I read the shocking Guardian article re Capital punishment, yesterday.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/935435
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/29/america-executions-death-penalty — Amity
:rofl: Stunning ignorance. :lol:Pandeism (all is spirit) and Materialism (all is matter) — Gnomon
No I didn't. I asked you to philosophically consider (my proposed summaries of monist-immanent) pandeism & acosmism as alternatives to (dualist-transcendent) deism.You asked me to reply to comments that you had previously made. — Brendan Golledge
That's almost as obscenely vile as Israeli apartheid that everyday oppresses non-Jews especially in the Occupied Territories, West Bank & Gaza. Police (everywhere) should "conscientiously object" to protecting only Official Israeli spaces (e.g. consulates, embassies, government offices, businesses, etc) instead. Mass murderers, no matter how triumphant they are in the moment, reap what they fucking sow. :fire: :mask:One can now apparently be a "conscientious objector" re: providing security for Jewish spaces — BitconnectCarlos
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WorshipI'm not sure what worship is — bert1
I think the place to start is by exercising our 'massively distributed' modes of agency in solidarity to struggle against political-economic-cultural systems which minmize and/or eliminate the social agency of any humans anywhere possible for us to do so. In other words, to the degree we humans are emancipatory and disutilitarian with respect to all humans (as well as non-human species) is the degree to which, imo, we become more than "just objects" (i.e. atomized beasts of burden, cattle, sheep, etc). :death: :flower:How can we humans avoid being just objects? — Angelo Cannata
Yes and no. The latter opposes – struggles against – the inhumane and counter-productive (i.e. destabilizing) excesses – strategic blindness – of the former.is it geopolitical and historical reasoning that is blind to universal humanitarian concerns or is it universal humanitarian concerns that are blind to geopolitical and historical reasoning?
As an American, my two bits: "pro life" folks, especially those who are also pro-guns, pro-death penalty, pro-voter suppression & anti-immigration / ethno-nationalist, seek to control (reverse) demographic trends by controlling women's bodies and use 'Bronze Age superstitions' (rather than modern science / medicine) to 'justify' their movement. :mask:Abortion - Why are people pro life? — Samlw
:smirk: :up:↪Shawn I think it's like a preschooler asking if her parents also hate the monster in her closet tormententing her. For some it goes further; asking why her supposedly loving parents allow monsters to occupy her closet — ENOAH
According to Genesis, God created Adam and Eve with free will too weak to resist temptation and not disobey. God also created the serpent and the Tree of Knowledge. Adam and Eve are set up to fail by God then, when they do fail, God punishes them for His failure to make their free wills strong enough as well as for His failure to tell them that He, not the forbidden fruit, would cause them to die (i.e. denied access by God to the fruit of the Tree of Life). Adam and Eve didn't Fall, God set the trap for them and all of their descendants; thus, Evil was created – "allowed" – by God in the first book of the Torah. :fire: :eyes: :pray:God didn't allow anything. — javi2541997
If so, then why call it "God"? (Epicurus)One solution to that problem is divest God of omnipotence. — BC
:chin:According to the Bible, God very much dislikes evil in its various forms. — BC
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things. — Isaiah 45:7, KJV
But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? — Job 2:10, KJV
Simply, like footprints in sand on a beach, "the statue" (pattern) is a secondary quality and "the clay" (material) is a primary quality; thus, unlike the latter, the former is not physically conserved.How are the clay and the statue related? — frank