↪180 Proof So which one are you? — Punshhh

There is a point though, only an idealist [immaterislist], of some kind, would restrict what is to what can be said, or known by a person. Surely by contrast, a physicalist [materialist] of some kind would allow any of an infinite number of other possibilities and the fact that we cannot observe them directly doesn’t preclude their existence. — Punshhh

Define what you mean by "lefty wokeness"?
— 180 Proof

The left. The not-‘MAGA’. — Fire Ologist

[Is] maga the only evidence of the disease of not thinking post enlightenment? — Fire Ologist

And an illusion is something that only a mind can entertain. — Wayfarer

Or, more to my point, is lefty wokeness a symptom of not thinking too, ...? — Fire Ologist

[C]onsciousness ... appears inexplicable.

That’s not a cognitive failing, it’s a conceptual one. — Wayfarer

[R]eality is what there is. To posit something "beyond reality" is to posit more [than] what there is. "Beyond reality" is not a region; it is a grammatical error. — Banno

What should we[I/you] think about?

Nothing within physics is distinct from philosophical [metaphysical] nothing. — ucarr

If you think the universe was preceded by nothing, then you must explain how nothing transitioned into something. — ucarr

Any one-sentence OP is basically click bait. — Wayfarer

beyond our reality — an-salad

Tranwomen are women. Transmen are men. True or false? — Philosophim

What emerges as fundamental are the invariances. The constraints of symmetry and then the degrees of freedom that result. — apokrisis

I think it most plausible to consider that what we cannot introspect is 'neural', and that it is precisely it's character as non-mental that makes it impossible to introspect. — Janus

Do we really have free will?

Man can do what he wills, but he cannot will what he wills. — Arthur Schopenhauer

It's not that we must avoid pains -- it's that we shouldn't be the cause of our own mental anguish; the pains aren't so bad as they stand, and the pleasures are not so alluring that we need to punish ourselves for not obtaining them. — Moliere

As you stated, eudaimonia is hardly objective. — javi2541997

But my post was in direct relation to how Epicureanism was outlined by 180 Proof. And with that description I yet disagree. — javra

What are the bad pleasures according to Plato? — javi2541997

... a world equal to nothing is impossible

Do you see errors? — ucarr

So the Real World is an "evolving structure" that has existed forever, cycling but never beginning or ending. — Gnomon

Does that sound like a reasonable alternative to the current scientific evidence that space-time [false vacuum collapse] suddenly exploded from a mathematical point into a complex [spacetime]?

Does forever causation make the Hard Problem of human consciousness irrelevant?

"Religion is the opium of the masses" - Karl Marx.

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful," - Roman Stoic philosopher Seneca the Younger (c. 4 BC–AD 65).

Most ideas that come from Abrahamic religions start with an idea that supports the belief that God exists and then uses weak logic to support it. [ ... ] Since theism rests solely on smoke, mirrors, and blind faith for it to work, it can be be dismissed ... — dclements

[C]omplexities arise in steps from that simplex; the supposed 'God' is a complexity and thus cannot be First. — PoeticUniverse

'Idealism' is not ancient. — Wayfarer

The idealists collapse epistemology and ontology [what is known is equivalent to what there is], claiming there is no substantive distinction between the two, while the materialists maintain a substantive distinction [what is known is a fraction of, or exhausted by, what there is]. — Janus