Comments
-
Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)Addendum to
Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal. — former president Richard Nixon, interview 1977
... for fuck's sake, like Rome, the Pax Americana has finally explicitly devolved from republic to dictatorship. :brow: -
Can the existence of God be proved?
:up:Whether we opt for the magic space wizard or the leader of the glorious revolution, we're probably fucked. — Tom Storm -
Gödel's ontological proof of God
:fire: :up:God's words are infinitely more puissant than mine. He can speak me into existence, allegedly, but I cannot return the favour, and nor can Gödel. — unenlightened -
To What Extent is the Idea of 'Non-duality' Useful in Bridging Between Theism and Atheism?You've misread me (so far): I'm saying that "duality" (or "the split" as you call it) is only an epistemological issue that's been mistaken for – incoherently reified into – ontology. As for your doubts of naturalism, Jack, I hope the (last) 2 links in my previous post provide you with some (more) food for thought that is both "theoretical", as you say, and also, more significantly, existential-pragmatic.
-
Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)Obviously, NOS, you have not yet thought through how the MAGA Six Justices just gave Dark Brandon a get out jail free card! If the MAGA caucus in Congress tries to impeach POTUS, "The King" can order any or all of those morons rounded-up and shot before the vote to impeach even happens. :mask:
-
US Election 2024 (All general discussion)1July24
SCOTUS rules, in effect, that POTUS is a "King" with Absolute Immunity from criminal prosecution for Official Acts.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-supreme-court-immunity-1.7251423
So, as an official act of National Security, POTUS aka "King Joseph I" SHOULD "decree" by Executive Order (A) immediately strip US citizenship and Secret Service protection from, (B) immediately freeze and then seize all domestic and foreign assets from, and (C) immediately incarcerate in The Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp Trump and his MAGA gang of January 6 & Russian Collusion co-conspirators indefinitely.
But will "King Joseph I" do this?
No. Even though, as of today, it's (apparently) legal for POTUS to do so. :angry: -
Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)1July24
SCOTUS rules, in effect, that POTUS is a "King" with Absolute Immunity from criminal prosecution for Official Acts.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-supreme-court-immunity-1.7251423
So, as an official act of National Security, POTUS aka "King Joseph I" SHOULD "decree" by Executive Order (A) immediately strip US citizenship and Secret Service protection from, (B) immediately freeze and then seize all domestic and foreign assets from, and (C) immediately incarcerate in The Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp Trump and his MAGA gang of January 6 & Russian Collusion co-conspirators indefinitely.
But will "King Joseph I" do this?
No. Even though, as of today, it's (apparently) legal for POTUS to do so. :angry: -
To What Extent is the Idea of 'Non-duality' Useful in Bridging Between Theism and Atheism?
"Non-duality", like monism, I don't find as "helpful" (i.e. incisive) as double-aspect theory¹ (e.g. Spinoza's mind-body parallelism of Substance/God) because I assume "the split" is epistemic – different, complementary ways of describing the same entity – but not ontological.I wonder to what extent such a non-dualistic viewpoint offers a solution to the split between materialism and idealism, as well as between atheism and theism. [ ... ] I am focusing on the idea of non-duality and asking do you see the idea as helpful or not in your philosophical understanding, especially in relation to the concept of God? — Jack Cummins
I also think "materialism and idealism" or "atheism and theism" are logical negations of one another and yet each is consistent with – dependent on – any of the monist, dualist, pluralist or non-dual ontologies. IMO, "a non-dualistic viewpoint" doesn't "solve" these logical negations (i.e. "the split"), only denies-ignores them.
No. I'm a pandeist²Do you believe in the existence of 'God?
No. I'm a naturalist³Do you support a philosophy of idealism?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-aspect_theory [1]
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/718054 [2]
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/871001 [3]a
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/800071 [3]b -
Is atheism illogical?
I've no quarrel with that. Of course folks are entitled to their own idiosyncratic, placebo-fetish (i.e. cosmic lollipop) of choice. My quarrel is, however, with theistic deities of religion: they are demonstrable fictions, and therefore, it's not "illogical" to reject them as facts (i.e. real, intentional agents).I say, the logical concept of god is what is logically possible to each and any given individual person, based on that individual's experiences. — Pantagruel
And this depends on which "concept of god" is at issue, doesn't it? In sum, clarify your "god-concept" (my preferred conception is ).... the possible existence of "god" ... at the logical-conceptual level ... -
To What Extent is the Idea of 'Non-duality' Useful in Bridging Between Theism and Atheism?
No. No. And yes I think they are "connected".idealism and belief in God. I wonder are the two connected as philosophical ideas? — Jack Cummins
(A proper response to come later.) -
Can the existence of God be proved?
Yes, that's magical thinking (e.g. "The Great OZ" behing the curtain), or the cross-cultural god-of-the-gaps (i.e. appeal to ignorance) fallacy. More than "assumed", such a "God" is worshipped (ritually mass-deluding). Bronze & Iron Age religious traditions consecrated their naturalistic and moral ignorance by magically denying it and naming that supernatural denial "God". :sparkle: :eyes: :pray:He's assumed to exist. To be the ultimate cause behind natural events — BitconnectCarlos
. -
Can the existence of God be proved?
Pardon, but I'm concerned with a social "view of the idea of God" preached in religious traditions and actually worshipped (i.e. idolized) by congregants. It's this totalitarian "view of idea of God" that significantly affects cultures and politics and pacifies collective existential angst (e.g. excuses social scapegoating, martyrdom, holy warfare, missionary imperialism, etc) rather than anyone's speculative "view of the idea of God" (such as yours, JuanZu, or my own ).my view the idea of God — JuanZu
Fear of the unknown (ergo 'god-of-the-gaps'), or uncertainty (i.e. angst).What is the need for God? — Ali Hosein
It is atavistic like ghosts (or shadows), "a legacy" of every human's infancy: magical thinking.Is God a legacy of the past that remains to this day?
"God" is a supernatural fantasy (i.e. fetish-idol ... cosmic lollipop) that many, clearly not all, thoughtful and/or well-educated humans outgrow.Or is it a natural concept that will remain with humans forever?
I suppose solving the problem of mortality (or scarcity) will consequently dissolve "the problem of God" (i.e. this may be the meaning of humans expelled from "Eden" in order to keep us from eating from the "Tree of Life" so that we "know death" and "fear God" (re: Genesis 3:22)).Is man able to solve the "problem of God"? -
Can the existence of God be proved?Scientists and scientifically literate persons do not misuse (misinterpret) physical laws that way – and obviously, bert, you're neither a scientist nor scientifically literate if you believe nature's regularities / structures are "inexplicable" (akin to supernatural mysteries ... miracles, woo-of-the-gaps, etc).
-
Can the existence of God be proved?
No. Physical laws are mathematical (computable) generalizations of precisely observed regularities or structures in nature and they are only descriptive (constraints), not themselves explanatory (theories).[physical] laws themselves are taken to be bruteand inexplicable, no? — bert1 -
US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
:up:US elections are for Democrats to lose or win. — Benkei -
Can the existence of God be proved?
I suppose this is reasonably assumed whenever "God" is ascribed (according to tradition, scripture, doctrine, testimony) properties, or predicates, which entail changes to the observable universe: those "God"-unique changes either are evident or they are absent, ergo "God" so described either exists or does not exist, no?Why do we believe that God is something that can be proven? — JuanZu -
The essence of religion
Nonsense. If "existential rationalism", then there can be no "rational answers" for an existential nihilist. :roll:Since there is no rational reason for the existence of life, existential nihilism is the rational answer. — Tarskian
Such as?There are only spiritual reasons ...
(Btw, when you say "spiritual reasons", do you mean 'reasons given by spirits'? :eyes: )
"Salvation" from what?There is no salvation ... -
The essence of religion
Unlike philosophy being 'metaphysics derived by deductive / dialectical reasoning', religion consists in 'metaphysics expressed through symbolic myths' (e.g. "Platonism of the masses" according to Nietzsche)..In its essence, like philosophy, religion is metaphysics first. — ENOAH
If by "suffering" you mean folly (i.e. ignorance of one's own ignorance, unexamined living, habits of poor reasoning, magical thinking, reality-denials, etc), then I agree with you.[P]hilosophical attempts to alleviate human suffering ...
Why does that matter?None of these approaches are apodictic.
Why assume "rational reason" is applicable to "existence" especially since "existence" (a) cannot be nonexistence and (b) "rational reason" presupposes "existence"?there is no rational reason for the existence — Tarskian
This phrase doesn't make sense. "Existential nihilism" is chosen and not entailed, otherwise it wouldn't be nihilistic. "Rationalism", as you say, assumes that reality – existence – is logical (i.e. inferential, algorithmic, computable) but that logic must be learned (i.e. signals filtered from noise), that the aptitude for reasoning – orderliness / regularities ("laws") of nature – is intrinsic, or "innate", and competence with reasoning – testable modeling ("sciences") of nature – is an acquired set of skills. "Existential nihilism" is the choice to reject "rationalism" as a way of life (i.e. existential project) as well as rationality, or logic, as an epistemic method/criterion of judgment, and therefore, not the inevitable consequence of "rationalism". Spinozism, for instance, does not entail "existential nihilism".always leads to existential nihilism — Tarskian -
US Election 2024 (All general discussion)Both sets of exams can be independently verified by a third party (audit) if Biden's campaign is serious about getting the maximum effect (no matter how marginal). If not, if the "perception" is so irreparable", then he needs to step aside like Lyndon Johnson did in 1968 – of course, VP Harris might also lose (after a brutally divisive convention floor fight) like VP Humphrey lost to Nixon. :brow:
The disgraced puke (former US Rear Admiral) Dr. Ronny Jackson is a MAGA (morons against great america)-stooge congressman from Texas. -
US Election 2024 (All general discussion)Yes, of course, the ballot box will be the final arbiter but if Biden stays in the race he has to address the "senile, enfeebled" issue with evidence his surrogates and down-ballot Dem candidates can use while campaigning to better inform voters. Biden's duty is to drop out and failing that I think he has a duty to the US electorate to provide medical reasons as well as performative displays which corroborate why he doesn't step aside. And the contrast with The obsese, neofascist, criminal Clown's response to a medical & cognitive exams challenge will not be lost on the still persuadeable +5% of voters in "the swing states" which will decide the election in the Electoral College.
-
My understanding of morals
I have not stated or implied any "moral judgment against" you or anyone in the current discussion. I've only taken issue with your concepts and conception of moral philosophy for being uselessly vague and arbitrary.your moral judgment against me — T Clark -
The essence of religion
:up: :up:[R]eligious doctrines posing as a philosophy of consciousness ... mysticism as anything other than a pacifier of sorts (albeit somewhat essential in its role on mental stability). The path to woo woo is the way. The destination of woo woo is delusion/madness. — I like sushi -
US Election 2024 (All general discussion)I think Biden should have a complete physical and cognitive exams which witll then be released in document form (minimally redacted only for national security) and summarized by his physicians in a public press conference asap. He should also publicly dare The obese, neofascist, criminal Clown to do exactly the same, and let the chips fall where they may with the voters. :mask:
-
US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
:roll: Stop being hysterical. Biden's competent, effective administration is not populated by "senile bitches"; however, The Clown's "Project 2025" will be populated by a fanatically loyal horde of "incorrigible morons" just like him. Neofascist autocracy is far far worse than the neoliberal status quo, and whoever can't see that will no doubt F-A-I-L the national IQ test in Roevember. :mask:Ceding life as we know it to the incorrigible morons is bad enough. Ceding it to senile bitch Biden? It's too much. Biden has to go. — hypericin -
My understanding of moralsNo. It seems that in the US at least,"the police" – established by laws – only enforce the 'controls of society' which are instituted by laws passed by legistlators and reviewed/applied by courts.
I don't see the point you're making with this reference except that Emerson seems to "morally" excuse e.g. antisocial psychopathy ... almost as Heideggerian / Sartrean (romantic) "authenticity".As for antisocial psychopathy, I'll point you to the Emerson quote I just used in my previous response to fdrake. — T Clark -
Is atheism illogical?
Whatever that means, it's not that. Usually atheism is a reasonable rejection of 'any god described by theism' (with predicates entailing empirical facts about the universe which are lacking ...) just like other imaginary entities.So if your definition of God is that God is the highest form of consciousness... — Pantagruel -
US Election 2024 (All general discussion)Well anyway ... Sleepy Joe In A Coma still beats The neofascist criminal Clown like a dog in Roevember. :victory: :mask:
-
My understanding of morals
What makes this "guidance of my intrinsic nature" moral? Suppose you are an antisocial psychopath: is acting "in accordance" with psychopathy also moral?... my actions will be in accordance with the guidance of my intrinsic nature, my heart if you will. — T Clark
Laws, legistlation & jurisprudence correspond to "social control". I think learning techniques of self-control (from e.g. exercises, stories, exemplars, dilemmas, conflicts, etc) which are independent of – not enforceable by – "social controls" is what primarily concerns moral philosophy.[F]ormal moral philosophy [ ... ] It’s a program of social control - coercive rules a society establishes to manage disruptive or inconvenient behavior
Does this also mean that to specify "how other people should" reason, "is not" logic?... any philosophy that specifies how other people should behave, is not moral at all, ...
Anyway, by "moral" do you mean (something like) 'cultivates flourishing'?
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "really a philosophy" in contrast to "really" not "a philosophy".... or even really a philosophy.
180 Proof
Start FollowingSend a Message
- Other sites we like
- Social media
- Terms of Service
- Sign In
- Created with PlushForums
- © 2025 The Philosophy Forum