My understanding of 'Thus Spoke Zarathurstra' is that it involves a process of 'waking up' , beyond the everyday conventions of 'robotic' functioning. This includes conformity to religious perspectives. I see this work of Nietzsche as signifying the depths of any genuine quest within philosophy, which involves all questioning of conventions, religious, or probably, all ideologies. The book explores this, especially in the form of metaphorical understanding. — Jack Cummins
Yes, one of the reasons probably... Nietzsche's main question, how we get beyond Christian values after the dead of the Christian God is still an open question. But other reason also play a role no doubt, he was a very good writer, he has a knack of drawing you in... he's a tempter ;-). — ChatteringMonkey
...which people hadn't realized yet. — ChatteringMonkey
The definition I'd offer is that to know is to process information correctly.
Process here means/is defined as a computation, which is the reconfiguration of an input to an output.
Information here means/is defined as any structure (an object, a string of symbols) that can be binary/digitally distinguished. — Hallucinogen
What characterizes the mindset associated with honesty? Considering that individuals may occasionally engage in falsehoods, how do we conceptualize the mindset of honesty? Is 'honest' a noun or a verb? Can one still be deemed an honest person if they occasionally engage in deception? — YiRu Li
Technology seems to be especially suited for such an unquestioning, mechanicistic, and optimistic approach to religion/spirituality. — baker
It is already happening in the Pagan communities. — Bret Bernhoft
The second quote attempts to explain the first. — 180 Proof
If anything, I see a convergence between what you call "techno-optimistic religion" and existing religions/spiritualities. — baker
"I have no idea" because what you describe, Bret, does not make any sense to me. — 180 Proof
Post-singularity ubiquitous smart nanotech seems more likely to transform planetary civilization into a Global Experience Machine^ (à la "The Matrix" or wireheading^^) than to enable hedonic beings to somehow "transcend" (or to religiously seek "transcendence from") being hedonic. — 180 Proof
The tone of some cosmism seems to be similar to your modern techno-optimism, though of course the technological focus has changed. — Jamal
Just don't confuse it with anything spiritual. — Wayfarer
Phase locking is not energy. It is something which occurs in physical processes. — wonderer1
...do you have any links to support these claims? — flannel jesus
The US forefathers risked everything for democracy and obviously, life is about more than matter. — Athena
Which energies do you believe are known by science but materialists all reject? — flannel jesus
Are those forms of energy something physicists know about and study? — flannel jesus
Such as? :chin: — 180 Proof
That is what Thomas Jefferson, and Cicero before him, meant when they spoke of the pursuit of happiness.
Before we focused education on the advancement of technology for military and Industrial purposes, we had education for conceptualizing, and being overly materialistic was deemed inferior. Learning a technology is for the working class, not the ruling class.
Concepts are not matter and yet they can be very powerful. Some concepts are very spiritual in nature and this can improve our health. Clearly, there is more to reality than matter. — Athena
Energy is, believe it or not, considered part of the material world. Materialists believe in physics. Physics is all about how matter is moved around and changed by energy. So saying these things can't be accounted for in materialism, and then saying "that's because it requires energy to happen", seems to be a misunderstanding of materialism.
Of course materialists believe in energy! How else could matter move and change momentum!? — flannel jesus
Really? Why not? — flannel jesus
All the sources of knowledge we have to choose from make living a wonderful thing. It appears you want to enjoy it all as I do. — Athena
How can "a beyond" the here and now provide "something better" to us within the here and now?
As a non-"materialist", what is it (ontically? epistemically?) about the material that you oppose?
What do you mean by "reality"? — 180 Proof