Comments

  • Bannings
    .. that doesn’t mean we have to tolerate dehumanizing statements.DasGegenmittel
    :100:

    Welcome to TPF.

    :up:
  • Misogyny, resentment and subterranean norms
    @Tobias

    Re: legacy of absentee / abusive fathers reinforced by pervasive religious-cultural misogyny ...
    Here's all you have to know about men and women: women are crazy, men are stupid. And the main reason women are crazy is that men are stupid. — George Carlin
    Case and point: :eyes:

    Many great[MALE] thinkers thru history have warned men about females.Gregory
    Be more discriminating (i.e. less reliant on random, context-free "ChatGPT quotes"): schools of thought such as e.g. Daoists (early), Pythagoreans, Platonists (the academy), Epicureans, Kynics, Spinozists, pragmatists, existentialists (20th century) ... advocated equality (not equivalence) of men and women. Imo, only "red pilled" incels (e.g. manosphere click-baits) blame feminists for the(ir) "trouble with women".
  • Arguments for why an afterlife would be hidden?
    :fire: ... imagine Sisyphus happy.

    I think the longer one lives the more adaptive habits suffice and the less one needs a "real purpose". I aspire to the condition of a 'happy immortal': to affirm existing as an end in itself like music ... amor fati.

    :flower:
    Death is not an event in life: we do not live to experience death. If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present. Our life has no end in the way in which our visual field has no limits. — Ludwig Wittgenstein
    :death:
  • Do you wish you never existed?
    There's no joy without suffering, no life without death. The entire reality we exist in is formed around this cyclical dual phasing. We are part of this reality, this nature as all beings, only we are aware of this cycle in a way no other animal is.

    But that also gives us a responsibility to handle this knowledge; it is both a burden and a blessing to have it. Not to see the suffering of others, but to form a balance and harmony with the reality of it. We can't reject our existence in that sense, we need to harmonize with it. With all concepts of it. Life, death, the cycle; entropy perceiving itself. So... perceive it and don't waste this experience of being. We can fight for all to experience it as well, to gain the well being of experiencing reality; but we cannot disconnect anyone or ourselves from death itself, or their part in the cycle.

    We are all food for nature, in some form or another. Like the bacteria in our guts slowly eating us through life only to fully consume us in death. They've cultivated us as their cattle, nurtured in symbiosis until the final feast of their lives.
    Christoffer
    :100: :fire:

    I wish I never existed.Truth Seeker
    I think about suicide every day and have done so for 37 years. The main reason I haven't killed myself is that it would cause suffering to my family and extended family. I would love to be happy. I would love to be cured of my CPTSD, Bipolar Disorder and Chronic Nerve Pain.Truth Seeker
    A latter-day Sisyphus – no doubt your struggle (i.e. love), my friend, is stronger than your suffering – let that be your peace. There are no solipsists in foxholes. :flower:
  • Do you wish you never existed?
    No. Soon enough ... it'll be the case again that I/we have never existed.

    :up:

    :up:


    :death: :flower:
  • Arguments for why an afterlife would be hidden?
    I [am] assuming an existence that doesn't interact with the physical world in a way we can detect.TiredThinker
    For us, then, that is nonexistence (i.e. fiction (e.g. ghosts)).

    ... if our thoughts on the origins of the universe shift a lot each time we get a new telescope resolution
    'Cosmogenic speculations' change far more rapidly in response to more precise and more varied observations than our well-tested cosmological theories which are glacially updated. There are not "a lot of shifts" in our knowledge, just click-bait press buzz about the latest computer-assembled telescope images du jour. Imho, metaphysical reflection – "our thoughts on the origins of the universe" – is not impaired, or informed, by mere 'scientific speculations' alone.

    Without a clear purpose what can we know, and with our lifespans being virtually nothing compared to the duration of the universe how can we even determine themes and patterns.
    I don't understand what you mean. Elaborate (or reformulate)..
  • Tortoise wins (Zeno)
    What would you say that "physical space" is made out of? [ ... ] The ancient Greek atomists limited the capacity to divide physical substance by positing fundament particles, atoms. The atoms would be indivisible.Metaphysician Undercover
    :up: :up:

    Ergo physical divisibility is finite.

    But Aristotle demonstrated ... why the dualism of matter and form was required.
    Clearly, Aristotle did not understand that Democritus' atoms are physical and not just abstract (i.e. not formal/metaphysical – "platonic").
  • Tortoise wins (Zeno)

    To reach the finish line, the tortoise must first cross half the distance to it, then half the remaining distance, then half of the remaining distance again, and onward infinitely.Metaphysician Undercover
    Physical space is not "infinitely" divisible like abstract space. Like most paradoxes, this one is merely apparent – it's derived from confusing the physical and abstract.
  • What is faith
    Not always.Gregory
    Usually.
  • PROCESS COSMOLOGY --- a worldview for our time
    If you can prove[demonstrate] that the universe is self existent ...Gnomon
    How do we know that the universe (multiverse) is not "self existent"? :smirk:

    Suppose the universe (multiverse) itself is, in fact, 'Spinoza-Einstein's God' ... :fire:
    .
    non-origin ...
    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/972157

    Möbius loop-like (eternal) process ...
    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/955151
  • What is faith
    Faith: belief in the unbelievable in order to excuse the inexcusable e.g. "teleological suspension of the ethical"~S.K. (re: cultic/religious practices); also, worship of "magic" (i.e. superstition).

    My only point was that ideologies whether religious or not, being based on some dogma or other, are one of the main problems which plague humanity.Janus
    :100:

    Yet our perspective is not the full picture and it lacks finality. We do not know what comes after this life.BitconnectCarlos
    In fact, we don't – cannot – know that anything "comes after this life". We do know, however, that we have to live this life together is inevitable; thus, Hillel the Elder's response to the request to say the whole meaning of the Torah while standing on one foot:
    What is hateful (harmful) to you, do not do to anyone.
    Notice the Rabbi did not say "have faith"...
  • Are moral systems always futile?
    [A]ren't all universal moral systems inevitably going to be flawed in some way ...Dorrian
    No.

    ... and therefore rendered futile?
    No – this does not follow (i.e. hasty generalization fallacy).

    ... the concept of "goodness."
    e.g. flourishing via preventing or, as much as practically possible, reducing harm to others, no?

    If its a true[ly] universal moral system, it will be objective. Not saying it can't be improved upon ...Philosophim
    :up:

    They're not futile systems as much as incomplete, but necessary (in spite of their incompleteness!) ways of thinking. Or suggestions.Moliere
    :up: :up:
  • PROCESS COSMOLOGY --- a worldview for our time
    :up:
    All postulated explanations refer to something antecedent or transcendent to the Bang itself.Gnomon
    Not so. There is far more physical evidence of, for example, cyclical cosmogenesis than for (your) "fiat lux" ... i.e. Aristotle's teleological physics is as philosophically useless as Ptolemy's geocentric epicycles or (e.g. Whitehead's) pseudoscientific 'intelligent design'.

    (specifically)
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformal_cyclic_cosmology

    (generally)
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model

    NB: For the umpteenth time (see my member profile), the only answer to the ultimate why question that does not precipitate an infinite regress – beg the question – is that there necessarily is no ultimate answer to why. (vide Democritus ... Spinoza ... Meillassoux ... (also: Fr. G. Lemaître, Hartle-Hawking, R. Penrose, D. Deutsch, C. Rovelli, S. Carroll, et al)) :fire:
  • What is faith
    My point is that faith is a poor way to arrive at truth because there is nothing it can't justify. Which is why I've generally said if you have good reasons for believing in something, you don't need faith. For me faith is best understood as the excuse people give for a belief when they don't have good reasons.Tom Storm
    :100: :up:
  • Deep Songs
    Thanks :flower:
  • Contradiction in Kant's Worldview
    I don't see reason as a disembodied thingJanus
    :100:
  • What is faith
    I'll work hard to set aside any jokes about onanism.Banno
    :smirk:

    As my fundamentalist friends often say, "Don't think, don't reason, have faith."Tom Storm
    Waste of grey matter. :pray:

    Teleological explanations ...Hanover
    are avoided by modern biologists.

    :up: :up:
  • Deep Songs
    And when I,
    I wanna kiss you, yeah
    All I gotta do
    Is whisper in your ear
    The words you long to hear
    And I'll be
    kissing you

    And the same goes for me
    Whenever
    you want me at all
    I'll be here,
    yes I will
    Whenever you call

    "All I've Got to Do" (2:02)
    With the Beatles, 1963
    lyrics Lennon-McCartney
    performers The Beatles

    Re: a smooth (playa's) distillation of 'young romance' (thanks, Smokey) :smirk:

    "Give the drummer some ..." ~JB
  • What is faith
    Spiritual, philosophical, mystical...Gregory
    i.e. self-availing, self-unfolding, self-emptying :zip:

  • What is faith
    In lucid moments the real cannot be exhausted by the truth.
  • What is faith
    Neither: I adjust my "beliefs" until the "contradiction" dissolves.

    Well, the consequence of my disbelief in any "higher meaning and purpose" is the meaning and purpose of flourishing here and now Life is just a cosmic coincidence that consecrates living lucidly from dust to dust.

    faith or science
    i.e. make-believe (opiate) vs knowledge (surgery)
  • On eternal oblivion
    belief in the impossibleFire Ologist
    aka "religious faith"

    When the body dies and decays, everything about me, everything particular to “me”, is gone.
    Yes; like when an orchestra disbands, their music stops.

    :fire:
  • POLL: Power of the state to look in and take money from bank accounts without a warrant
    No. If a government agency suspects overpayment of benefits, then they should stop further payments until the dispute is resolved either by mediation or in court.
  • Contradiction in Kant's Worldview
    :up: :up:

    The division between self and world is itself part of what the brain constructs.Wayfarer
    That's merely empirical, not transcendental – in Kant's system (CPR); your statement doesn't make sense, Wayf.
  • On eternal oblivion
    @Zebeden
    The most generally accepted scientific hypothesis for the beginning of space-time is the Big Bang theory — Gnomon
    False.

    And some believe that I am what I remember. Hence, no remembrance, no Self ...
    Some deduce that embodied self-continuity is fundamentally what "I am", and therefore if no embodied continuity (i.e. no substrate functionality), then no self-continuity (i.e no PSM or user/introspection-illusion) and no self-aware identity (i.e. no autobiographical subject). Re: Buddha, Epicurus, Spinoza, Hume ... :fire:
  • Contradiction in Kant's Worldview
    Truth is always seen.Gregory
    I doubt this statement is true.

    It's not always reco[gn]ized
    No doubt.

    That knowledge-of is a construct of mind.tim wood
    For different reasons, e.g. Democritus (re: sensory conventions, limitless divisibility of things) and e.g. Parmenides/Plato (re: change/appearances aka "the many") proposed the idea of (subjective) "construct of mind" millennia ago. Kant just 'a prioritized' this with arbitrarily complex – convoluted – schema; of no use, as you acknowledge, pragmatically or in cognitive scientific terms.

    [W]e experience the world but can't truly understand it.Gregory
    However, we can approximately – defeasibly – "understand it" and sufficiently enough for us to adapt and thrive in the world (i.e. nature) with which a priori we are entangled (pace Descartes, pace Berkeley).
  • Contradiction in Kant's Worldview
    If you haven't already, consider Schopenhauer's critique ...

    Kant's use of the antinomies was to demonstrate that we do not know such things -- we can rationally argue for both the assertion and the negation, and both will appeal to reason, and they can be put side-by-side and end up in contradiction. For Kant this shows a limitation on reason's ability to answer some questions.Moliere
    Yes, Kant's antimonies are (it seems to me) a modern reformulation of classical equipollence (re: Pyrrho / Sextus Empiricus ... no doubt inspired by, or derived from, Socrates' elenchus (esp. early Platonic dialogues)).

    I rather think contradiction is certainly a necessary part of logic. Or, maybe, if not a necessary part, then at least the fundamental ground for the validity of logical constructs [reason] .Mww
    :100: (re: LNC)

    :up: :up:

    Kant's great idea: that science is the science of appearances, and that appearance always entails the subject for whom it is appearance.Wayfarer
    Given that "subject" is also an "appearance", this so-called "great idea" amounts to a tautology. :smirk:

    And while it is fashionably modern to be dismissive of many of his [Kant's] ideas, at close look, they still hold!tim wood
    Such as? :chin:
  • Arguments for why an afterlife would be hidden?
    The universe necessarily will outlast its "immortal" inhabitants and yet its configuration and composition (i.e. complexity) is not everlasting (re: cosmic entropy); therefore, by your logic, neither "immortals" nor (this) universe in themselves matter.
  • On eternal oblivion
    As death is inevitable, one of the main questions any person can ask themselves is what awaits us when we die.Zebeden
    when you are dead, there is no longer a "you".Banno
    when you are out of the game nothing will disturb you because there will be no 'you' to be disturbed.Janus

    :fire:

    What bothers me, though, is that there is no reason to believe that consciousness cannot reoccur again. — Zebeden
    On the contrary, all impersonal evidence suggests that, even while alive, "self-consciousness" is the river one cannot step in twice. What you/we "believe" doesn't change this fundamental fact of nature. (Re: "afterlife" from a 2023 post)

    :death: :flower:
    If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present. — Ludwig Wittgenstein
  • The United States of America is not in the Bible
    It is a fact that the United States of America is not in the Bible. — Arcane Sandwich
    Babylon (OT).

    Rome (NT).
  • Bannings
    Philosophy can be a dangerous mind game at times and injuries do occur.boethius
    :up:
  • Can certainty exist without us being able to be certain ourselves?
    Your premise seems to refute, or invalidate, itself – to wit: if "certainty does not exist", then it is also uncertain that "certainty does not exist".
  • What do you think about Harris’ health analogy in The Moral Landscape?
    The point is not necessarily to seek a greater, cosmic purpose, but to improve the quality of life for ourselves and others, fostering a world where suffering is alleviated and wellness maximised. In this sense, you might say that improving the world becomes its own form of meaning; rooted in the tangible, real-world consequences of our choices and actions.Tom Storm
    :up: :up:

    e.g. tikkum olam ...
  • What can I be absolutely certain about?
    What can I be absolutely certain about?Kranky
    Given that you are not an "absolute" being (or clinically neurotic/paranoid), imo you are "certain about" whatever you lack rational grounds to doubt.
  • Ukraine Crisis
    United States of Kakistan
    6March25

    from Paris, France
    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/974404
  • What is faith
    theism is falseMoK
    :100:
  • What is faith
    consciousness collapses the wave functionGregory
    Afaik, it's impossible for a classical being (with classical sensorium) to be conscious of non-classic (planck-scale) phenomena. Thus, without consciousness of the wave function, "consciousness collapses the wave function" does not make sense (pace N. Bohr et al).

    NB: I'm more or less an Everettian layman.