@universeness, a valiant effort indeed, but sometimes the best thing on can do is to laugh and walk away. — Banno

However, another way to look at Matter-vs-Mind or physical-vs-non-physical [ ... ] in terms of Classical vs Quantum science. — Gnomon

Metaphysician Undercover

Feel free to ignore science all you want and remain delusional about what you think you know about energy conservation. I will continue to listen to those who actually do know what they are talking about, namely, physicists and not metaphysicians. — universeness

Why are you so helpless 180? — Metaphysician Undercover

https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Energy_loss#:~:text=When%20energy%20is%20transformed%20from,form%20of%20energy%2C%20like%20heat.

Notice, there is always energy loss, and "Energy losses are what prevent processes from ever being 100% efficient." Hence the inductive conclusion I made, the law of conservation has been proven to be false.

I don't think we all realize the fundamental assumptions guiding our moral beliefs:

1. we are humans.
2. as such, we have emotions, beliefs, desires, fears, etc.
3. from this, we know we have a common ground upon which a moral discourse can succeed.

That a society is stupid, ignorant, low IQ, backward mentally, uneducated, brainwashed, and just plain sociopath is not an excuse to promote relativism as an acceptable moral principle. Relativism is a dangerous [self-refuting] moral view. — L'éléphant

I think the point is not that morals need or don't need justifications, but instead that humans animals and agents, whomever can't thrive properly or healthily under extreme negligence and continuance of this negligence whether intentional or not eventually leads to inevitable demise. — Cobra

We are in that sense like a structure emerging, for a finite time, from something we are no less a part of, like a wave which rises from an ocean, views the limited oceanscape visible from its peak, and then crashes down and disassembles back into the ocean itself.

The wave, and the ocean, are both water when all is said and done. — Benj96

Of course, there is also the whole is/ought thing which no one can address adequately. — ToothyMaw

Re-reading: The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea, Yukio Mishima. — javi2541997

Old Gods, New Engimas: Marx's Lost Theory by Mike Davis — Maw

... there is a need to explain mind also. — Mark Nyquist

My claim is that all experiments, each and every one of them has demonstrated that not all the energy conserved. — Metaphysician Undercover

...the law of conservation is not true...
— Metaphysician Undercover

We're still waiting for the disproof of Noether's theorem (e.g. a "perpetual motion machine") ... — 180 Proof

because the world is round
it turns me on
because the world is round

because the wind is high
it blows my mind
because the wind is high

love is old, love is new
love is all, love is you

because the sky is blue
it makes me cry
because the sky is blue

Metaphysician Undercover doesn't believe in instantaneous velocity. Hence it is not wise to spend time considering his views on matters involving physics. — Banno

The argument remains that if spirit has an impact on the physical world, then it does work and hence uses energy. That is, if spirit has an impact on the physical world then it is part of physics. Any posited dualism collapses. — Banno

When a thinker induces generalizations from scientific premises, theories and experimental data, s/he is a metaphysician. — ucarr