Copernicus

Because those questions have subjective answers and argumentative grounds. Biological issues are subject to experimental and empirical truths.

What is this question doing on a philosophy platform? It warrants a biological truth, not argumentative conclusions.

because it's giving them a good feeling, at least, if no other transactional motive is present.

Whatever goes against you (want/desire/interest/feelings).

Well, everyone is. Whether it's a refined one or not.

Desire for/from oneself. That's the thing. Selfishness is self-interest, not self-supremacy, at least in my definition.

I see.

I don't think there's anything in life, ultimately, that is not an attempt to serve self interest.

Perhaps I'd have to use a better-suited word. But I've explained what I mean by "physical".

I think this is an undisputed issue and needs no further argument.

both fall in the same category.

Anything born out of (may or may not be within) the universe.

I have already discussed it here.

Philosophy IS propositional conclusions without empirical evidence. Aristotle's four-element posit was a speculative conclusion.

If they stemmed from physical properties, then they're also physical properties, regardless of characteristics.

They may. But we won't know. Just like we can't see infrared or hear ultrasonic.

You again miss the point. Both are different. In 100-500 years, we may find out that time, space, color, energy, etc, are physical properties that bec...

Exactly. Both have different classes.

I meant to say "count" (like physical objects). Like eyes can't see themselves. Consciousness itself is a kind of sense. I may accept soul to be a cat...

When I said physical, I meant a product of physical events. But even those byproducts are physical properties to me. For example, a chemical reaction ...

clearly not my view, then.

I think I caught what you mean. No, that's not my view. I don't see the universe as a collective body or discard the idea of a creator/programmer. Whe...

What I meant is that the viewer can't see itself, sometimes. The mirror can't see its own reflection within itself. Consciousness cannot explain consc...

The mind is physical process (neural and hormonal). But not tangible. Energy, in a way, is also physical (because it can be converted into matter, or ...

Unfamiliar with that.

we can't, yet. Just like we can't see our eyes or lick our elbows.

I don't know about that.

@"83nt0n"??

your point is?

Just out of curiosity, what would you do in this situation: At 14:59:53 o'clock, a man, charged with serious crime and sentenced to immediate death-by...

As an individualist, I'm stuck.

Yes. Both party's. Not to deontological individualists.

if by "soundness" you mean empirical proof, then I must remind you this is philosophy, not science.

my point was, it is not imperative to dissect the universal patterns to propose that everything is physical (unless you could proof something abstract...

So is the mind or emotion. Or dark matter and dark energy. Or quantum mechanics. Each is on its own league and level of difficulty.

I don't think we need empirical lab test before statement in philosophy. Philosophy is argumentative proposition.

Absolutely not. Math (formula) is a language — a human creation. Laws of physics means the nature of the universe. It can be uniform or disorganized. ...

...and?

How so? If you bring it down to numbers then you're a utilitarianist. That's literally the core of utilitarianism. Then what is the solution? There yo...

Of course not. Laws are laws whether we understand them or not.

not the premise of the argument.

part of the natural process.

depends on perspective.

What is your suggestion on that? If we leave theistic views aside, I'd say it's a complex process that we're too early to understand. The same way the...

Everything follows the law of physics. We're just a few decades or centuries away from understanding them.

The key point here is not the action itself, but the preference (even "choice" isn't the right word). That is a completely different scenario because ...

We haven't reached that level of sentience/sapience yet to crack that. Don't think we will.

I'm too trifling to understand how the universe works.

Because the universe is not uniform. The sun and the moon aren't the same, nor are the elephants and the fungus. Each is on its own level and game.

What separation?