:roll: You know I do ...↪180 Proof .... Don't you have any arguments? — Sam26
:clap: :100:The title of this thread is "Evidence of Consciousness Surviving the Body" and you go on cherry picking "evidence" that are testimonial and you ignore all the scientific body of evidence.This is dishonest. Then you declare testimonial evidence to be "academic" when Science rejects subjective opinions by default!
Ignoring credible epistemology makes your claims pseudo philosophical — Nickolasgaspar
:up: :up: :up:Is there an external world? Yes.
Do we experience it as it is [not experienced by us]? No.
Is our knowledge of it an accurate representation of it? We try — Fooloso4
True. However, the jury's still out whether or not emergence like this is (or will attain) substantial 'progress'.Human ability to manifest intent, purpose and intelligent design is being combined and enhanced by memorialised information which has resulted in an ever increasing pace of human invention of new tech and discovery of new knowledge.
This IS evidence that we are moving towards 'points of pivotal change,' at a faster pace. Movement towards advanced AI for example ... observable emergence ... — universeness
:clap: :100: Claiming I don't "listen to him" is just disingenuous whining coming from someone who over the last several months repeatedly won't answer (or refute as invalid) a handful of my straightforward questions about his "worldview" ...Since he won't listen to me
— Gnomon
You're not the only one he doesn't listen to, but nor is he the only one that doesn't listen to you. I struggle with your posts, and I suspect others ignore your stuff too. — bert1
Make the argument, señor.180 Proof claims philosophy and god are incompatible. I beg to differ. — Agent Smith
I think 'chess is the possibility-space (i.e. actuality) of all chess games and players are the potential realizers of all chess games' is clearer.I think chess is a good analogy. Once the concept of chess exists all possible chess games are given potential. Once a chess game is played (even in one's mind) that chess game becomes real. — EnPassant
And yet in the mouth of (most?) believers these days, "God" is just a three-letter epithet (or crutch) for ego ("why").My argument is that you need to stop believing in yourself in order to believe in God. — unenlightened
"There's a place for" unintelligibility-inexplicability (i.e. "divine mysteries") "in phlosophy" (i.e. the love – pursuit – of 'masterful intellection-explication')? :roll:[T]here's a place for god in philosophy. — Agent Smith
This is confused, you've got it backwards, mon ami. :smirk:Pandeism has residual elements of religion while pantheism doesn't. — Agent Smith
Perhaps struggle is all we have because the god of history is an atheist, and nothing about this world is meant to be. So you must wake up every morning knowing that no promise is unbreakable, least of all the promise of waking up at all. This is not despair. These are the preferences of the universe itself: verbs over nouns, actions over states, struggle over hope. — Ta-Nehisi Coates, Between the World and Me
Yeah, we're congenital magical thinkers. Up to about a third of us are quite susceptible to the placebo / nocebo effect.Is it innate to us to consider such an entity when given no prior exposure to the concept? — Benj96
I don't think so.And if so, does that itself have any implications on the argument for or against such an entity?
"Everyone" can't "get behind" the fact that the Earth is round so any prospect less concrete – rorschach signifier – is a non-started for "everyone" to agree on.So what ought be the dogma of an" acceptable God?" One that everyone could get behind. — Benj96
Whitmer for President with running-mate Newsom for Veep works just as well for me too – maybe even better!Watch California governor Gavin Newsom for President (with Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer for VP). Now that's a MAGA-killing ticket! — 180 Proof
