panpsychism — schopenhauer1

The scream of pain when slapped across the face is simply an extension of the sound the slap itself makes when the open hand connects with the cheek! :snicker:

physics is philosophy — Landoma1

PhD?

too obscure. — Bitter Crank

Heraclitus, the obscure! When you wanna talk about stuff no one's ever, you tend to come off as "obscure" which, to my reckoning, is Greeks just being (too) polite; Heraclitus was actually a madman or an idiot or both!

:snicker:

Dante's peak prick? — Landoma1

:snicker:

Correct. One of your sporadically insightful observations. :wink: — Wayfarer

:lol: I wouldn't want to cause an outbreak!

You don't hope for anything? — Tate

Hope or Cope? :snicker:

I believe I already mentioned this before.

Supernatural, interpreted as something extraordinary, elecits/begs one of two responses:

1. Revision of our theories pertaining to the supernatural event: Science [we could be wrong, back to the basics].

2. Maintaining the theories pertaining to the supernatural event, but hypothesizing an entity/being that caused the supernatural event: Religion [we're right, but now there's something else, god(s)]

What is it that philosophy can and cannot do? — Fooloso4

It cannot cook!

What is the goal of argumentation? — Fooloso4

To find a good reason to get into a fist fight!

:snicker:

No. Concept and percept are not separable or even two really existing categories. The distiction is purely theoretical. — Landoma1

:chin: :snicker:

:up:

Agent Smith, formally and foremost, I seen your latest thread went well. Congratulations... I have also noticed that space is not unbound from 'what is' and seems to fold back on itself. There are no vast open space, where no stars exist, they all seem to be evenly scattered throughout.

I imagine that space is expanding because of prospected counter force of super spacial phenom, like a gestalt. — Varde

Danke! :blush:

Yea, I've heard of that - space folding - before. We're, it seems, in the dark and hence none of these hypotheses have been falsified/confirmed. I spoke too soon, oui?

Then we're fucked! Do you really think consciousness can be programmed? — Landoma1

I hope not! Consciousness has, to my reckoning, many facets to it; the logic has been replicated (on computers) but not duplicated, if you catch my drift.

Do we get fooled by AI?

What if we are AI? we just don't know it (yet)! Vide creationism, simulation hypothesis.

What's the latest on the JWST? Did we find ET?

Perception smoothes the grainy world structure. The water feels like a continuous stuff. — Landoma1

Like how AI is used to "correct" images on telescopes here on earth and in outer space?

So, man is a synonym for superape!

So an übermensch (superman) is just a super-duper ape!

"I'm an ape, are you Bishop?" - Richard Dawkins

"I'm not,  definitely I'm not. I'm special, made in the image of God, in the creative mind of God, creative as God who made me. That's the difference between the ape and me." - Bishop Boniface Adoyo

"Well, I'm an ape, I'm an African ape and I'm very proud to be an African ape and so should you be." -Richard Dawkins

Friedrich Nietzsche... :snicker:

Nobody likes me, that's for sure. — Olivier5

:snicker: Same here! Join the club.

Clearly there were/are very good reasons to philosophize rather than daydream which was what people were doing pre-philosophy (mythological sense-making). Like all good ideas, the ship of philosophy was launched successfully using rationality as an advanced engine. All was going well until the philosophical counterparts (Agrippa the skeptic being one) of Kurt Gödel wrecked the whole project, blew it clean out the water.

All that's happenning these days in philosophy is the spirits of people who don't know they're dead and lying at the bottom of the ocean in the wreckage are still going about their lives as if the ship of philosophy never sank, as if they're not dead but alive or those who've realized this rather unfortunate state of affairs are conducting salvage operations in and around the sunken ship. No, not rescue missions; everyone on board perished, they just don't know it.

:snicker:

Like the first time, he got tired of us.

Don't Look Up. — Olivier5

We aren't exactly likable, are we?

(Brief) suspension of ego. :up: — 180 Proof

Self-abnegation! :fire:

Did you ever come across the psychiatric "disorder" known as Cotard's delusion? It's defined by what has been termed "nihilistic" delusions. A typical symptom is the patient vehemently denying their own existence: "I don't exist" i.e. "I'm dead."

Anatta (no self) in Buddhism is also a similar sentiment.

Transcendence via self-negation: To leap beyond what I am I must reject what I am.

God. He wants a nuclear Armageddon. — Olivier5

:snicker: Any ideas why, of all the things possible, he'd want that?

Ares up to mischief, again?

Hope, to my reckoning, is how we respond to/deal with uncertainty; it usually consists of ethical expectations (I hope she's fine) but not necessarily so (I hope the guard doesn't notice us). The OP is, in all likelihood, about hope of the former kind (good hope) and not the latter (bad hope).

Hope then is a mashup of quasi-fatalism (we don't control all aspects of our lives) + optimism (success is ensured).

ecstatic
— 180 Proof

Or are you thinking more etymologically?


from ek "out" (see ex-) + histanai "to place, cause to stand," from PIE root *sta- "to stand, make or be firm." — ZzzoneiroCosm

Most interesting! — Ms. Marple

In ecstacy we step outside of ourselves!

To use Descartes’ famous example, a mental image of a chiliagon (a 1,000-sided figure) cannot be clearly distinguished from a mental image of a 1,002-sided figure, or even from a mental image of a circle. But the concept of a chiliagon is clearly distinct from the concept of a 1,002-sided figure or the concept of a circle. — Wayfarer

Most interesting! — Ms. Marple

Conceptually distinguishable (rationalism) but perceptually not (empiricism).

I wonder about the extent of the conflation among distinct objects that occur due to the low-resolution of our senses?

Russia started the war, but who caused the war?

well, space isn't, and neither are solar systems. Perhaps you refer to it's becoming upon it's death, and it's relativity — Varde

How do you know? Because it's still expanding? :chin:

According to The Elijah Price/Mr. Glass Principle, at least one actual infinity exists. Considering the universe is the best candidate for an actual infinity because of its size, I'd say, yes, the universe is/hasta be infinite.

Did anyone mention Siddhartha Gautama, the light of Asia?

He dealt with metaphysics by, well, inducing analysis paralysis (thought block) using the much-studied Nagarjuna's tetralemma (hic sunt dracones).

Vide The Parable of the Arrow.

The Buddha was in fact switching off the mind, probably before it imagines a lethal cocktail of ideas that could destroy us all (re God is not great - Late Christopher Hitchens).

:snicker:

The OP's question is marvelous!

Why is math's utility "unreasonable"? I guess the answer has to do with scope (cross-domain applicability) and strength (the certainty that it guarantees).

What should worry us:

1. Maslow's hammer

2. The Streetlight Effect

You should be a billionaire!
— Agent Smith
Yes, I too agree that 180 Proof is a modern day version of Socrates. :grin: — dclements

:snicker:

:clap:

Transcendence, the world demands it, on a daily basis as far as I can tell. 9 times outta 10, we I fall flat on my face; being selfish (sensu amplo) is hardwired, instinctual, irreresistable, but we I must try, oui monsieur?

I don't know what this means. I don't speak emoji, and don't know where these two words are removed from, nor to what they refer. But thank you for your interest. — karl stone

:ok:

Well don't disseminate me, Agent Smith! — Kevin Tan

:ok:

Human beings might think that they are special, but they're not. — Metaphysician Undercover

The only thing different between animals and humans is that the latter can alter their perspective on life but the former can't.

Yes. Or no. I don't know, I really need more time. — Kevin Tan

We Have All the Time in the World!

:snicker:

Still trying to work out who those millions were, and why "Belgiums", especially considering that Belgium is actually a country. :chin: — Wayfarer

:rofl:

believe IN — Ken Edwards

:cool: Aha!

Cover me
when I run
Cover me
through the fire
Something knocked me
out the trees
Now I'm on my knees ... — Shock the Monkey

:up:

I'm slow; to compound my woes, I ain't steady. :snicker: Neither a hare, nor a tortoise!

:smile: