Dawnstorm

I tried to track down the essay, because Calvino doesn't seem the type to give lists, at least not to set them as authoritive or exclusive or anything...

I've thought of this, too. I gave up, mostly because I was overwhelmed by the complexity. It starts with your birth. If you're not there, then, for ex...

Human sense-making arises out of our daily praxis: selective attention and all that. Our terms cluster around that, too. We think in terms of original...

Pretty much. Outside of that it only survives in specific idoms, such as "Woe is me," which I've seen native speakers miscorrect to "Woe is I" (which ...

As a native speaker of German, I'm unsure what difference they articulated here. It certainly doesn't work for "cold", as "I'm cold," is most commonly...

Ah, yes, of course. I missed that (thought of it in another context, but somehow didn't make the connection on the practical front). Thanks.

Yes, that's all perfectly clear to me. What's not clear to me, for example, is why they can't skip forward to day n. I know they can't, but it makes n...

Here's what they know: A blue-eyed person knows there are either 99 or 100 blue-eyed people. A brown-eyed person knows there are either 100 or 101 blu...

Haven't been on here for a few days, so I just now saw this. I'm looking at this argument, and I don't see how you can argue this while holding that c...

Fundamental =/= Omnipresent If CON = Present, CON = Fundamental If CON =/= Present, N/A Also, I think the term "everything" is problematic in the sens...

It now seems like you're not actually saying "everything" is conscious. That's perfectly fine, since consciouness being fundamental doesn't imply ever...

I'm not sure "subjective experience" works as a definition, mostly because this uproots what "experience" means: you sometimes express sympathy for "f...

Thanks for the recommendation. This looks very interesting.

The opposite is true often enough, too, though. If we stay with the Beatles, take Strawberry Fields Forever, whose original recording sees two version...

I've found that my intuitions on these two words tend not to pan out, but here they are anyway: I'm thinking of empathy as being experiental and sympa...

Anyone-who-says-otherwise clauses tend to have the potential to hurt someone down the road. (Aside: My first thought: "Why can't they just enjoy ice c...

Oh, good. I wasn't sure I'm making sense. For me, there's this intuitive substratus, and then there's the attempt to explain myself. Sometimes I notic...

This is probably a thread of its own. You say later that: And under that concept there's probably no way to make sense of what I said. I'm not quite s...

I'm reading this and rubbing my chin trying to figure out what positions are clearly contradictory. It's messy to begin with. Me, I'm generally uncomf...

Yeah, what did I think making that post? It's never been the facts that are at issue. Which I don't think I do: And that's, I think, where the disjunc...

I've been interested in the biology of sex since the 1980ies, but I'm really bad at understanding biology. However, reading about biology from biologi...

Think of it in terms of intentionality, then. When you get the flash, what you focus on is influenced by relevance horizon. You don't just focus decon...

I've let this settle for a while, because I wasn't sure how to answer this. I don't think you've addressed the more important part of my post: and tha...

This is difficult. I think there's a twofold meaning involved here: memory vs. imagination as a psychological function, and remembering vs. imagining ...

I've never had problems with this, other than minor stuff (like the meditation technique I mentioned not working on me; also creative writing exercise...

For most of my life I thought "mind's eye" stuff was some sort of metaphor. I was in my fourties when I first heard about aphantasia and by extension ...

Maybe we could try to approach this from the negative: what's the difference between not being able to imagine something, and not being able to rememb...

Or conversly, is it possible to have faith#2 without faith#1? A sort of practical faith that's not very concerned with the source? Just a deep-rooted ...

I've read C, but I'm stopping here for a reason. I'm not convinced an analytic combination of desire/will creates a fine-enough tool to look at the si...

My earlier post was whimsical and silly, and I sort of wish I hadn't made it, but there is a point hidden away in there and it concerns this: We make ...

Your set-up is confusing, though. If Pete were to decide to buy an Eccles 2 cake, would he be General Pete or Universal Pete. Would he know? My intuit...

I know and appreciate this. It appears to run deep. I'll slink back into the shadows and continue reading.

I believe it's this that's giving me trouble connecting. I feel like there's some sort of reification going on. I can accept a descriptive system that...

So what do we mean with "irrational", here? I can see three related but distinct meanings: (a) If you thought about it rationally, you'd come to a dif...

Similarly, there's evidence that planes sometimes crash. How many people check statistics to make an informed decision? So what's rational here? Your ...

I feel the framing is geared towards conflict from the get go. We're invited to emphasise the difference. What, in ongoing social praxis, does it even...

Sort of. Talking about the morality of social groupings rather than the morality of a person has had my hyper-aware of the metaphor I use. A base is s...

Yes, it's a piece of the puzzle, and I'm unsure how it fits. What I've not been addressing much is the social aspect. You acquire your moral values wh...

This is extremely difficult to think through without an example; and I'm not even sure what would count as an example. My hunch is that scrutinising y...

I'm unfamiliar with Nagel's position on altruism, so I just read some summeries and skimmed others. First, I note that every commenter seems to have d...

I have trouble answering this question for two reasons: (a) I'm not quite sure I understand your model (more later), and (b) I'm not exactly sure what...

Well, there are two things going on. One is how we make decisions based on value (where rational choice comes in), and the other is where value comes ...

I read the posts more as cost-benefit calculations (as in rational choice theory). It's not all that hard to account for altruism: even if there's no ...

I understand that (or at least think I do). It's precily the dynamic context, though, that makes the axiom meaningful. Otherwise it's just... floating...

This is excellent. I think the penny dropped... but the slot machine is kinda slow in operating, so I won't really know how much I agree/disagree unti...

Great approach. That could really help. Structural. Value arises out of praxis. Not really ethics/morals, no, though after a view permutations that's ...

I agree with this. It's entirely opaque to me how you get from here to "life is good". As I said, this means that life is value-neutral. Once alive, y...

This is so utterly against my intuition that I have a hard time figuring out what you're even saying. I'll only adress point (1), because here I'm sti...

That's interesting, thanks. I read the article; most of it felt familiar (the worldview part, for example, sounds straight out of phenomenological soc...

I remember reading this article. It sounded plausible, but since I don't actually know what sort of picture of God Dawkins portrays (the parts I read ...