Hello Banno, Although I cannot speak for what ucarr is saying (as I haven’t read it), I just would like to take this opportunity to clarify some misco...
Hello Count, I think the former definition is inadequate (as that is really just the definition of ‘emergence’, not strong emergence), but the latter ...
Hello Javi, Correct me if I am wrong, but then it sounds like you are simply completely disagreeing with me, no? What are we in agreement about then? ...
Hello Javi, I see. Unfortunately, I am not entirely following where our disagreement lies: could you please refresh my memory as to what, then, you ar...
Hello Hypericin, You positing something very thought provoking! Let me see if I can adequately respond. Firstly, I would say that propositions are sta...
Hello 180 Proof, I appreciate your response: let me try to adequately respond. How does that make it a form of pseudo-science? I am not claiming that ...
Hello charles, Kastrup usually starts by positing a mind-at-large as the best account of reality (to explain consciousness and newer empirical knowled...
Hello Pantagruel, This is interesting, but, unfortunately, I am not familiar with systems theory and that is why I was asking your system theoretic vi...
Hello Javi, I see. I am just a bit confused, as if you agree with my position, then wouldn’t that entail you agree with my definition? Or are you only...
Hello 180 Proof, I gave an argument here in the OP for a mind-dependent, qualitative world: let’s start there. What premise (or premises) did you disa...
Hello Banno, Excellent! I am surprised that no one has offered this parody yet, as I was fully expecting it. As you can already anticipate, I deny P1 ...
Hello javi, But this is a contradiction in terms: you can’t have a perspectiveless perspective, nor a non-perceiver perception. This is true, but I do...
Hello Charles, Spinoza, I would say, was arguing that the one substance is God, which doesn’t entail in itself a mind nor something mind-independent. ...
Hello Banno, I deny that “sucking on one teaspoon of sugar” is a quantitative process. The teaspoon, the sugar, and the act of sucking the sugar from ...
Hello Count, Wonderful post! I agreed with a lot of it. I am not sure how ‘truth’ as an relation between subject and object would entail strong emerge...
Hello Schopenhauer1, The argument itself doesn’t quite get you to Kastrup’s Analytic Idealism, but it does get to objective idealism (or actually I ma...
Hello T Clark, Interesting, I would say metaphysical claims are facts (or at least purported facts). Metaphysics, I would say, is the study of that wh...
Hello Charles, In my opinion, God, as a person that perceives, just doesn’t work as a parsimonious account of reality. Reality seems, empirically spea...
Hello javi, With your definition here, I don’t see the actual disagreement with what I said, as the act of perceiving requires a subject. So truth, ev...
Hello Philosophim, Same goes to you my friend! What do you mean by “apple”? To me, that is just ungrammatical and, thusly, does not reference anything...
Hello Pantagruel, Very interesting, let me try to pick your brain a bit. Given your invocation of Kant, would you say that there is a mind-independent...
Hello javi, Correct. Interesting! I didn’t really follow plato’s definition: how exactly are you defining truth then? Is it a platonic form for you? T...
Hello chiknsld, (: I appreciate you sharing this with me, and I will address it as adequately as I can in a moment; but I wanted to disclaim that appe...
Hello Pantagruel, Interesting: I am not quite following, but let me try to respond. What we know of immediatelly is subjectivity, and an ‘object’ in t...
Hello Inyenzi, That is awesome! That, indeed, would be odd; thankfully, objective idealism makes no such postulation: when you examine dead organisms,...
Hello Philosophim! That is fair. A quantity is ‘an definite amount’ (e.g., 3 m/s^2, 1 meter, 4 newtons, 80 volts, etc.); and a quality is ‘a non-quant...
Hello 180 Proof, By ‘objective’, I mean ‘that which is mind-independent’ and by ‘mind-at-large’ I mean that reality is fundamentally a mind. That mind...
Hello Charles Ferraro, I would suggest reading his ‘A Treatise Concerning The Principles of Human Knowledge’, which is a relatively short work outlini...
Hello Alkis Piskas, I am not sure if I fully understood the question, but I would say that it is possible for a thing to exist as emergent from the re...
Hello T Clark, I would say that objective reality is a mind-at-large, and our conscious experience is a survival-based dashboard of experience of ment...
Hello chiknsld, Correct. In my case, it also uses double negation and modus tollens—which I forgot to mention in the argument form: 1. If P, then Q. 2...
This is a very good point that I am honestly slapping myself for it! I definitely need to refurbish my definitions, as they are clearly insufficient. ...
I must concur with , as you are describing Schopenhauer's the 'Will-to-Live' (as he put it) and, I would say, not really the 'Will-to-Power' nor defin...
Intuitions, in the philosophical sense, are what one intellectual immediately grasps of the situation (whereas, in colloquial speech, it can also mean...
I agree. Kant, however, was more interested in our representative faculties and assumed, like a lot of people in his time, that newtonian physics woul...
I have found that Transcendental Idealism is interpreted very differently depending on the person and Kant was a very poor writer (as far as I am cons...
Hello Philosophim, It sounds like you would like to terminate the discussion, so, out of respect, I am going to refrain from responding to your points...
Hello Philosophim, Absolutely no worries my friend! I think, with all due respect, that we are completely speaking past each other on this dispute abo...
Hello Philosophim, I think we both see that certain aspects of our conversation do not seem to be progressing, so I am going to the parts that I think...
Hello Philosophim, I am saying that choosing between “knowledge sets” is a comparison. The moment you decide, by analysis within or without the “induc...
Hello Philosophim, I appreciate you summarizing our differences; but if that summary of my position is truly what you think I am claiming, then, with ...
Hello Philosophim, I wasn’t saying you use that term in your methodology, but there is no (as of yet) 1:1 term mapping that gets at what I am talking ...
Hello Philosophim, Good! I am glad to hear that! You are saying that, as far as I am understanding, the hierarchy which is more cogent is dependent on...
Also, to clarify my distinction between the essential properties of an identity of an entity and the relevant factors of resolving a dilemma within a ...
Hello Philosophim, I appreciate the elaboration: I see more clearly now what you are and are not saying. I want to say it back to you so as to confirm...
Hello Philosophim, You too! Fair enough: I will re-read the OP and the papers (from the previous discussion board); however, I feel as though I am ask...
Hello Mikie, Could you elaborate on some of them? Otherwise, I am unsure as to what about my characterization is incorrect. Everything you said along ...
Hello Mikie, Although helping the underprivileged is something we should all strive to do, I think that the use of someone's race or gender as a crite...
Hello Philosophims, You are confusing what a person can do with what they should do epistemically. It doesn’t matter if a person can act irrationally:...
Comments