Comments

  • Panpsychism is True
    I am but with other posters at this point because I found something of interest.schopenhauer1


    Uh huh.
  • Panpsychism is True
    What the hell is the point of the petty squabbling. Stop trying to be assholes or clever and state your case.schopenhauer1

    I did state my case. You clearly have nothing to say or you would have said something already.
  • Panpsychism is True
    Always good to associate with peers.tim wood

    I find you worthless. Maybe time to move on.
  • Panpsychism is True


    Not interested in kiddy stuff. Mostly undergrad punks trying to be competent. Might not be the right forum for me.
  • Panpsychism is True
    You last year? You're a junior now? A poem for youtim wood

    I teach college. I would ask you to leave my class.
  • Panpsychism is True
    But there is an historic aspect of all this barely touched on. The ancient Greeks attributed such order as they found in nature to "mind."tim wood

    Nous can be translated as mind, but also intelligence.
    For Aristotle, intelligence is as fundamental to the world as physical objects.
  • Panpsychism is True
    If you want to be a panpsychist, the best way to do so is to attack emergentism as hard as you can. If you can say that emergentism isn't true, and that consciousness is real, then you can say that consciousness is fundamental.Pneumenon

    Panpsychism is the idea that the universe is structured as intelligent. Intelligence is not derived from anything.
  • Panpsychism is True
    What do you think philosophy is about?bert1

    An interest in how the world is. Arguing is for sophomores.
  • Panpsychism is True
    You don't have to have one, but then you should be quiet,bert1


    Seriously, are there any adults who use this forum? Is this place just for kids?
  • Panpsychism is True
    You haven't done any philosophy here. Philosophy is about argument and rational justification for beliefs.bert1

    No. That's for undergrads who think they're masters because they know some names.
  • Panpsychism is True
    Wiki: Intelligence has been defined in many ways: the capacity for logic, understanding, self-awareness, learning, emotional knowledge, reasoning, planning, creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving. More generally, it can be described as the ability to perceive or infer information, and to retain it as knowledge to be applied towards adaptive behaviors within an environment or context.jgill

    Why do people keep citing wikipedia? Most philosophers use the SEP, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Panpsychism is True
    What Bannoschopenhauer1

    I reported Banno to moderators.
  • Panpsychism is True


    Go back and read what I wrote. I stated my thesis. Go outside for a walk if you have excess nervous energy.
  • Panpsychism is True


    Don't believe it. I have no patience for smart alecks.
  • Panpsychism is True
    Sorry. I was flippant about atoms having minds. But a mind is something which has mental states and mental contents, no? Where, or rather how, do we draw the line between the environment and ourselves?Zophie

    Right. I wanted to shift the discussion from consciousness to intelligence. Consciousness is an aspect of intelligence.
  • Panpsychism is True
    2. Varieties of Contemporary Panpsychism

    2.1 The Definition of Panpsychism
    The word “panpsychism” literally means that everything has a mind. However, in contemporary debates it is generally understood as the view that mentality is fundamental and ubiquitous in the natural world. Thus, in conjunction with the widely held assumption (which will be reconsidered below) that fundamental things exist only at the micro-level, panpsychism entails that at least some kinds of micro-level entities have mentality, and that instances of those kinds are found in all things throughout the material universe. So whilst the panpsychist holds that mentality is distributed throughout the natural world—in the sense that all material objects have parts with mental properties—she needn’t hold that literally everything has a mind, e.g., she needn’t hold that a rock has mental properties (just that the rock’s fundamental parts do).

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/
  • Panpsychism is True
    Well, I gotta admit, I was sceptical. But with an argument like that, what more is there to say? I'm convinced.Banno

    I find your childish insulting annoying. Do I need to report you to the moderators?
  • Panpsychism is True
    before we assume atoms have minds?Zophie

    Right. I want to stay away from what having a mind is and simply describe it as the principle of intelligence.
  • Panpsychism is True
    My only problem with panpsychism is that it's virtually indistinguishable from animism.Zophie

    Panpsychism is closer to the qbit. As Wheeler described it, no physical particle exists without information.
  • Panpsychism is True
    Another way of stating this is that the universe is inherently intelligent. This is an ancient idea that nous is everywhere in the world. Nous is mind or thought.
  • Panpsychism is True
    Panpsychism isn't neutral monism. Russell had in mind a third ingredient in addition to mind and matter.

    There's nothing special about neutral monism which is why it's neutral and unknowable.
    Zophie

    I think they're similar. But my point is not to equate the two, But I never read about this "third ingredient" from Russell.
  • Something From Nothing
    but it seems pretty clear that at rock bottom, there must be something that exists as a metaphysical necessity.Michael Nelson

    The fact that there is a world does not mean there has to be a world.
  • Wittgenstein Plays A Game
    We weren't talking about language games, but games in general, and whether all games must contain some common essential feature. Wittgenstein rejects this idea, claiming that games share in a family of similar features, but without there being one essential feature that every game must contain.Luke


    Right.
  • Wittgenstein Plays A Game
    Nevertheless, what about a game such as truth or dare. Is that a game? If so, what counts as successful and unsuccessful performance?Luke

    Generally I agree with what your position is. But it does seem that a language game has to convey something and not just be gibberish.
  • Wittgenstein Plays A Game
    Catching the ball means winning the game?Luke

    A game would require the concept of a successful performance. Does not have to mean winning.
  • Wittgenstein Plays A Game
    One example of a game is chess. There are rules of chess which can be learned in an hour. But the game is about winning and knowing the rules does little to help you win. Playing chess improves your game. Most good players study grandmaster games to learn how the best play.

    I think Wittgenstein's point is that chess is very complex because of its play and defining piece movements and rules will not tell us what the game is about.
  • Wittgenstein Plays A Game
    But there is such a thing as universal good - consisting of the union set of all things to which the word "good" has been applied to.TheMadFool

    Okay. But that seems abstract. Plato asks what is common about a good shoemaker and good statesman. After we say they perform their tasks well, what knowledge has been added to what we already knew? The problem with universals is not that they are wrong but that they don't convey the knowledge they're supposed to have.
  • Wittgenstein Plays A Game
    There is no common theme detectable in these three people and if Wittgenstein has the say then, good doesn't have a universally applicable meaning - its different for different people and has no fixed referent.TheMadFool

    Wittgenstein is criticizing platonism, the idea that we cannot understand the good without understanding what all uses have in common. I think Plato had this backwards. We do understand each use of good and do not need to have a universal concept of good.
  • 50th year since Ludwig Wittgenstein’s death
    We may (mis)understand.TheMadFool

    Yes. But that is not a problem of language.
  • 50th year since Ludwig Wittgenstein’s death
    Which is another way of saying meaning (of words) is not in reference but elsewhere and that elsewhere for Wittgenstein is use but, my suspicion is that words are being misused and since Wittgenstein's theory (of language games) is predicated on words being used well, it follows that his theory needs some adjustment to say the least.TheMadFool

    If you say something and I understand it then you have used words properly.
  • 50th year since Ludwig Wittgenstein’s death
    That family resemblance exists in the word universe doesn't imply that words have no referents, that referential meaning is flawed and so forth. What it really does is reveal errors in word usage and the cumulative effect of such errors.TheMadFool

    I think Wittgenstein's argument is not that words have no referents but that our understanding is not a function of their references.

    The problem is not that words are misused but that words don't have essential meanings..
  • 50th year since Ludwig Wittgenstein’s death
    For instance, continuing with Wittgenstein's water example, "water", first and foremost, refers to H2O.TheMadFool

    Right. You give a good analysis. The problem I have is using H2O as a universal.
    Is the lake and ocean both H2O? Not exactly. The ocean is salty and a lake is not. You can drink lake water but not ocean water.
  • 50th year since Ludwig Wittgenstein’s death
    What should I read for Wittgenstein?TheMadFool


    Philosophical Investigations. Also, a great reference for philosophy is the SEP, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wittgenstein/
  • Emile Durkheim's Philosophy of Religion
    in·sti·tu·tion
    /ˌinstəˈt(y)o͞oSH(ə)n/
    Learn to pronounce
    noun
    1.
    a society or organization founded for a religious, educational, social, or similar purpose.
    "a certificate from a professional institution"

    https://www.google.com/search?q=institution&rlz=1C1OKWM_enUS777US777&oq=institution&aqs=chrome..69i57.3121j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
  • 50th year since Ludwig Wittgenstein’s death
    [reply="Ban
    no;407069"]

    No, I meant, make your argument about the specific text. Are you new to philosophy?
  • Emile Durkheim's Philosophy of Religion
    Buddhism isn't a defined institution. Neither is Christianity really. Only a couple of Churches are actually institutions, the rest of them are all over the place.h060tu

    Missing your point. A church, by definition, is an institution.

jacksonsprat22

Start FollowingSend a Message