flannel jesus

that sounds like a "no particular reason" flavour of answer to me.

No not really. It still seems like there are things that don't have reasons in that case to me. Maybe I'm just being stubborn or something, but I don'...

I certainly think there's probably a brute fact somewhere down there, and that would pop out of nothing, yes, and that would arguably undermine PSR. I...

if some things have explanations, then there will always be some utility in understanding them. I think, even if we do live in a world with quantum ra...

I don't understand. What seems so weak it's irrelevant?

And the "A this time" would still be insufficiently explained, that's the problem, that's the disconnect between indeterminism and PSR. Like I totally...

Science certainly is searching for explanations, but I don't think science strictly needs it to be metaphysically true for EVERYTHING to have an expla...

And if it's sufficient, then the question would be why doesn't that thing always happen under those conditions? "The conditions were sufficient for th...

you could say that but it seems like that undermines PSR entirely. You could just say that for anything, and then nothing needs an actual explanation,...

if everything has an explanation, but determinism is not true, the problem for me is, where's the explanation for the undetermined event? If we look a...

idk what's reifying about it. I'm just asking if one idea being true would imply another idea is true. I'm not certain either of the ideas are true my...

For some, perhaps most, interpretations of qm, yes but not all. But the PSR doesn't have to be true. If a non deterministic interpretation of qm is tr...

My own reasoning in regards to this matter is, if determinism is not true - which is to say, if there are events in the history of the universe which,...

There are a few reasons. One is that materialism also had a completely unrelated meaning, a materialist is someone who seeks wealth and possessions, w...

huh?

I'm not sure we can "know reality as it is".

I actually agree with you about those, but not all illusions are like that. Take this album cover for example https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merriwea...

No you've got it, they would be competing preferences I think.

uh no not necessarily. someone can of course have reasons for choosing something that isn't their preference. I wouldn't even say that this example il...

how do we know about any illusions at all? Well, regardless of the question "how", it's not controversial to state that we DO experience illusions, an...

so then you've been agreeing with me the whole time, and just being really awkward about it? Classic

yeah that's what I was getting at in my second paragraph

sure

I like this, and agree with the spirit of it, but it's not necessarily literally true - you can want something, but also will not to want it, and turn...

It just doesn't match my intuitions about what attributes of things are.

I wouldn't call that an attribute of the piece of shit, no

I don't even think I'm saying something controversial when I say we don't experience reality as it is. Think about a piece of shit on the ground. It s...

you're asking me questions that have nothing to do with anything I said. Your questions are confused. Do you have anything interesting to ask?

Nope. I think you should just read about indirect realism for a bit

good, and you understand that indirect realists aren't saying "brain processes aren't real", right? Because that question that you asked makes me thin...

If you don't understand the difference between naive realism and indirect realism, the questions you're choosing to ask aren't going to help you

no, I didn't say our brain processes aren't real.

I'm saying our conscious experience is constructed by our brains. We aren't just raw experiencing reality as it is, we're experiencing a fabricated in...

it just feels like your words don't connect to anything. Bookkeeping the consequences of that on me? Mate, are you okay?

I don't see how anything I said lead to that response from you. I have a theory of everything because I believe actions have consequences? What are yo...

I just made a case. That's not free of consequences. That's my case.

That's right. We know we don't experience reality "as it is" for same very basic reasons - our visual and auditory ranges are rather arbitrary. Why do...

I would say we see stuff, we experience stuff, and actually I think Mr. Hoffman is right to call our experience a "UI" or "desktop" - but the stuff we...

why do you think there are choices that are free from all those things? especially consequences, that seems weird. that's like... anti-physics. "every...

and what does it mean, then, for free choices to exist? Free from what or free to what?

sounds like a semantic argument.

that question doesn't make sense. Seeing is inherently an experience. I don't think we "see reality as it is". I don't think "reality as it is" is a v...

let me put it another way: your support of mind dependence comes from the fact that everything we know has to come through a filter of human conscious...

That honestly feels like a cop out. Of course it's interpreted by us - everything we know and think has to come through a filter of us first. That doe...

if evolution has shaped us to see reality in a particular way, that implies there was a reality there prior to evolution. I mean, scientifically speak...

(I recognize this isn't the engagement you're looking for, and isn't very great for conservation, but) I really love Wolfram's approach to everything ...

Asking you to justify why right wing morality is "obviously more well developed" isn't about intense distrust or dislike. Someone saying left wing mor...

You start the paragraph with "I'm not" but end by confirming that you are. Bonkers

why are you talking about aggregates? So well developed just means more "conformed" as a group, why are you talking about it like it's a virtue? And t...

if that's not true knowledge, then nothing is