Comments
-
Your Absolute TruthsAnd yet the result of physics are only unfalsified explanations, not proven truths.
-
Is the mind divisible?I don't know of any limit to divisibility except fundamental planck units. "Mind" is a classical phenomenon, ergo divisible. As and others have pointed out, "mind" consists of conflicting / divergent impulses & processes. Bratshitz is just talking out of his incorrigibly uninformed, crypto-Thomistic, D-K bunghole again. :eyes:
-
Your Absolute TruthsProofs are only relevant in logic and mathematics, not natural science (vide Hume, Peirce, Dewey, Popper, et al).
-
Please help me here....Besides, doubting everything without warrant being a performative contradiction (as Peirce points out "a paper doubt"), it only follows from The Cogito that "doubting exists", not the doubter herself. And "ergo sum" is far from certain for psychotics afflicted with Cotard's Syndrome.
-
Your Absolute TruthsNatural science isn't in the business of "proofs".
You're missing the forest for the trees (thus "pedantic"). :roll: -
Trouble with Impositions
In order to address that very question.Why bother with philosophy then ... — baker -
Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here):clap: :lol:
Let's hope so. :vomit:So I guess DeSantis will be the GOP nominee then in 2024? — Mr Bee -
Your Absolute Truths:chin: By "your absolute truths" I understand statements which I find irrational – even contradictory – to doubt or deny are true. Here's what comes to mind:
From the physical to the ethical to the metaphysical in scope ... philosophical realism.(A) Total entropy of closed systems (e.g. post-planck era universe) cannot decrease. Corollary: local order is a transient phase-state (i.e. aspect) of global disorder.
(B) Every mind is nonmind-dependent and is, therefore, radically contingent (e.g. entropic). See Ciceronianus below.
(C) Gratuitious suffering is an objective moral fact.
(D) There are no unchangeable (i.e. non-contingent) facts, neither ourselves nor the universe itself.
:fire:Humans are as much a part of the universe as everything else. How's that for an "absolute truth"? Try to remove the "human-ish" from that. — Ciceronianus -
Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
e.g. @NOS4A2 & US House Minority Leader McCarthyCue the vampire making excuses. — Benkei
:sweat: :up:
As pointed out in this 10 February 2022 article https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/02/can-trump-be-barred-for-running-for-president-because-he-flushed-papers-down-a-toilet/ from Mother Jones magazine
[Emphasis added.]Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States. — Title 18, Section 2071, of the US Code
However, as of 8 August 2022, and the execution of a search warrant by the FBI at tr45h's Florida residence for evidence of illegally taken and retained / destroyed (classified?) documents, the likelihood of prosecution and therefore tr45h's disqualification from holding Federal office ever again is substantially greater. Punishments for Sedition, Insurrection, Defrauding the US Government, etc also include the same disqualification.
Addendum to -
Aristotelian logic: why do “first principles” not need to be proven?
Not "given." False dichotomy. 'Partial truths' have survival value; in fact, most of our "truths" are only partial / approximate, ergo fallibilism. Adaptive organisms are selected for traits which are effective enough (e.g. truthful enough) for finding food, mates and fending off predators long enough to reproduce profligately. The further removed from evolutionary pressures, the greater the opportunities to extend the scope of "truth"-making/telling beyond managing / satisfying the requirements of bare survival. Natural selection, Smith, generates only suboptimal solutions, and those which are effective enough tend to survive.Given the choice truth or survival, — Agent Smith -
Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)Fine legal point: the FBI executed a search and seizure warrant; they did not "raid" the residence (as tr45h said in his fundraising social media posting). Any evidence of any Federal crime found in this search and seizure will be admissable in court. The US DoJ used low-hanging fruit (re: classified documents violations) to get in and then went shopping for goodies in tr45h's private safe, etc. With so many interlocking investigations of tr45h's post-2020 activities going on in Federal, State & local jurisdictions, in American legalese, my friend, effectively insolvent, old fat fascist Donny is quite fucked. :victory: :sweat:
-
Trouble with ImpositionsWell, my "opinion" happens to agree with "objective truth", so stop whinging about it counter my claims of STFU.
-
Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)Shit just got real – from Putin's bitch to AG Garland's bitch! :clap: :lol:
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/08/trump-fbi-maralago-search-00050442
tr45h won't even win the GOP nomination in 2024 (if he runs,) because he will have to drop out of the primary race due to
(1) lack of money (re: civil damages from NYS suit + dozens of pending lawsuits + already abandoned by billionaire donors like Murdoch & Koch),
(2) criminal indictments in the state of Georgia (which his hand-picked supreme kangaroo court has no jurisdiction over to stop or delay)
(3) Rudy Guiliani & Mark Meadows – among other senior co-conspirators – will flip and their depositions will be leaked
(4) US House J6 Committee findings are, and the final report will be further, damning so much so that Independent voters (especially in "swing states") will continue to poll 2-to-1 against tr45h (& his MAGA/ "Stop the Steal" candidates)
(5) US Court of Appeals will invalidate tr45h's "self-pardon" AND SCOTUS will not hear tr45h's appeal (if only because old Donny has made an enemy of Chief Justice Roberts) &
(6) lastly, the odds favor tr45h either being assassinated (by Putin? MBS? MAGA/QAnon "true believers"?) or he'll just fucking finally drop dead by 2024 :up:
There are several other major reasons too (as I've pointed out for years) but those six should suffice to make the point: despite the media circus, it's a fool's bet to bet on this Dead Traitor Walking. :mask: -
Shamanism is the root of all spiritual, religious and philosophical systems
:up:Nevertheless, I still think that philosophy is apart from these "beliefs" — javi2541997 -
Shamanism is the root of all spiritual, religious and philosophical systemsA more likely candidate "the root of religion" is animism, or it seems to me. A precursor to shamanism, pantheism and (metaphysical) finalism / panpsychism. What do you think? :chin:
-
What do normative/moral terms mean on a realist construal?For my filthy lucre ...
Norms are procedural, not representational; they either (mostly) work or they don't, which is a fact (J. Searle ~ institutional facts). The traditional construal of "moral realism" is incoherent insofar as it's premised on the category error of conflating the procedural with the representational. And "error theory" likewise is incoherent for running with this "moral realist" premise claiming it is false and thereby concluding from this that moral statements are categorically false or meaningless. Logical Positivism by another name. The consequences of using norms – practices – are real (i.e. have inescapable impacts on matters of fact). Norms are practices, not just pictures (Witty).
YMMV. -
Shamanism is the root of all spiritual, religious and philosophical systems
"The truth" of what?Is Shamanism useful for discerning the truth? — Bret Bernhoft -
Lemonics
:cool:Oh, before I forget ( :grin: ), I wanna thank you for your post - very informative! — Agent Smith
Same reason that dementia, Alzheimer's and amnesia are weaknesses: "forgetfulness" (not ordinary, functional forgetting as I point out in my last post) debilitates agency.Plus, do you have an argument, weak/strong doesn't matter, why forgetfullness is a weakness and not a strength?
There's nothing, not even the worst, I want to forget – traumas are lessons from which (I hope) I'm still learning, so "no".Is there anything in your life that you don't want to remember or wish you could forget (but can't)? -
Lemonics
IIRC, the gist is that the human brain has a vast though finite number of possible synaptic connections which are "pruned" by lack of use through development and then reused to make new connections overctime – learning (plasticity) requires degrees of forgetting (weakening or eliminating old connections). Much of this "pruning" happens, neuroscientists surmise, while we sleep. The rhyme or reason of it is (still?) much debated; however, I'm partial to both neural darwinism and it's (synthetic) analogue connectionism as models of (autonomic?) memory formation / functioning / elimination (re: "subcognition"). IME, "remembering & forgetting" is a scientific problem, Smith, and no longer a fruitful topic of philosophical inquiry (except where philosophers of science are fussing over the (intractable?) fuzziness of concepts employed by neuroscientists).1. Metacognition
2. Cognition
3. Subcognition
I would like to query "is there a (very good) reason why we forget?" — Agent Smith -
Antinatalism ArgumentsFew things encourage me to, as Beckett says, "I'll go on" like reading the blackest passages of Cioran :cool:
:death: :fire:To get up in the morning, wash and then wait for some unforeseen variety of dread or depression. I would give the whole universe and all of Shakespeare for a grain of ataraxy.
My faculty for disappointment surpasses understanding. It is what lets me comprehend Buddha, but also what keeps me from following him.
I am enraptured by Hindu philosophy, whose essential endeavor is to surmount the self; and everything I do, everything I think is only myself and the self's humiliations.
In the fact of being born there is such an absence of necessity that when you think about it a little more than usual, you are left ... with a foolish grin. — E.m Cioran- The a Trouble with Being Born
:strong: :smirk:If one lives as though it is good to inhale, but bad to exhale, one will not be happy for long. — unenlightened -
Aristotelian logic: why do “first principles” not need to be proven?
Exactly! :smirk:Say what? — Gnomon
(The implication of what you wrote, G-mon. )
Anyway.
Yeah, the map =/= territory but that is precisely why the map is useful as a map. The map (i.e. mind-variant "representation") is an aspect of the territory (i.e. mind-invariant "ding-in-such") used to track other aspects of the territory and, in this way, the "ding-an-such" is approximately (partially) – though, yes, not completely – known (pace Kant). The efficacy of map-making/using for relationing to the territory is factual and not merely "a matter of opinion" (i.e. mind-dependent). Enactivism, a subset of embodied embedded cognition (EEC) – ever heard of it? :roll:
Clearly, Gnomon, you don't drink bleach – no doubt because the "representation" of its toxicity corresponds sufficiently with the bleach's "ding-an-such" for you to heed the poison warning label. Anti-realism (i.e. immaterialism) is demonstrably bad for your health. :mask:
Oyxmoron.MIND-DEPENDENT FACT
e.g. Asylums are filled with "Jesuses", "Napoleons" & "Klingons". :sweat: -
Please help me here....You've confused yourself again. Go try and score points elsewhere, MU.
-
Please help me here....
:lol: Pax.Life is in the imagery, [ ... ] But that's just my feeling about it. — Janus -
Our Minimal Epistemic Commitment (Fixing Descartes' Cogito)
Nice ... On that point, I yield. :sad:... this "perfomative contradition" doesn't refute their argument. — Michael -
Please help me here....
I didn't claim that there are other minds; why would I? Those who are in doubt, or deny there are other minds, are making the extraordinary claim idly without grounds to do so. Like you are / have.What is your grounds for other minds that doesn't PRESUPPOSE other minds? — GLEN willows
Cite where I have made an "argument from authority". FYI: corroborating one's arguments with others' arguments / positions is not fallacious as you seem suggest, "newbie".And before you make any other "arguments from authority" ... — GLEN willows -
Please help me here....
What is "ridiculous" is assuming a perspective for which there are not any grounds to assume and then use such an groundless assumption as a conditional or premise.Can you see that if you were the only mind, these arguments would be ridiculous. — GLEN willows
Epistemic warrant (of assent) does not require that claims (re: e.g. other minds) "be certainly established". Reasonably, there are not any grounds to doubt that there are other minds. -
Aristotelian logic: why do “first principles” not need to be proven?
:chin: So "human minds" are human minds-dependent "facts"?... facts. They don't exist apart from human minds. — Gnomon
: -
Please help me here....Well then, "newbie", apparently you've not understood the counter-arguments made throughout. Your profs know their business – solipsism is "silly" & "incoherent" – and you have not "proven" otherwise.
-
Antinatalism Arguments
Inertia.So why put it off? — Darkneos
Besides, why rush the inevitable? Nothing lasts (i.e. entropy, anicca). The "chore" of respirating & metabolizing will end soon. Death is the only god that ever comes whether or not you cry out for her. Until then, savor sleep's daily respite; if, however, you're an insomniac, well Darkneos, you have my sympathies ... :sad:
Consider Man's Search for Meaning by Victor Frankl. -
Our Minimal Epistemic Commitment (Fixing Descartes' Cogito)
As I've pointed out, your argument doesn't even do that.It's not supposed to be a sound argument. It's supposed to show that the claim "only one mind exists" is coherent. — Michael
Non sequitur; I neither claimed nor implied as much. Your / solipsist's reliance on logic, however, presupposes others. Read what I actually wrote again.Classical logic (and others) doesn't depend on there being other people.
180 Proof
Start FollowingSend a Message
- Other sites we like
- Social media
- Terms of Service
- Sign In
- Created with PlushForums
- © 2026 The Philosophy Forum