boundless

Perhaps the best way to do you in your case it to take seriously those teachings you find 'unbelievable' at least as good allegories that say somethin...

Sorry, but I don't understand your point here. Are you claiming that if a behaviour that is blatantly in contradiction with a religion's 'code of cond...

It is pretty standard but it should be noted that there are differences in how Mahayanists see the Theravadins. Indeed, it seems that the earliest tim...

I believe that @"Wayfarer" meant that the end goal for Theravada is a state in which the 'enlightened' can't help other sentient beings. Buddhas and a...

Ok, I'll quote some of those suttas. I leave the judgment for the reader. It seems to me evident that these suttas treat the belief of literal rebirth...

Given your clarification, I think I might return to this thread. To be honest, I don't think you'll find a satisfying answer to your question here. Un...

Yeah, it was an interesting typo lol. I'll fix it now. Thank you very much!

I am merely stating an hypothetical: "if I am a transcendental subject and my existence is contingent, there must be an explanation of my own existenc...

Yes, but note that his own philosophy leads to the inevitability of admitting the existence of the noumenon. By his account, the transcendental subjec...

Interesting. I would class Hegel among those who redefine the 'transcendental subject' as a singular non-contingent subject. Indeed, Hegel was a panen...

Ok. But it is instantiated in individual rational beings? I don't think that Kant would say that it can be found elsewhere. So, if individual rational...

@"Wayfarer", @"Joshs" and @"Mww", The 'main reason' why I think that Kant's 'transcendental idealism' and those 'transcendental approaches' advanced b...

No, you don't. But, again, a vital part of philosophy of physics is, in fact, clarify the meaning of the concepts that are used in physics. As I said ...

Is the framework's existence contingent or necessary? If it is contingent, it seems to me that this implies that it is possible, in principle, to expl...

I somehow missed @"Joshs"' post. However, I am not sure how even that reply really addresses my points. I get that. However, the perspective of each t...

Is the 'consciousness of every thought' the consciousness of a given individual sentient/rational being? If so, this means that the transcendental sub...

I won't reply to all your points because I believe that there is a deeper difference between our positions and I think it is possible we will simply "...

I think that this point I am making addresses both of your posts, so I'll write a single response. From what I have understood so far, the 'transcende...

Strangely enough, many physicalists would actually say that you agree with them. If the mind is merely "what the brain does" it is ontologically not d...

Yes, if we can make valid statements only about the transcendental a-priori and the empirical world, then, yes, the 'noumenon' is unknowable. But that...

Ok. But how is this different from an indirect realism that say we can have only a distorted knowledge of the noumenon? I thought that Kant believed w...

I'm not sure. Intelligibility of an entity merely means that, in principle, the entity has some kind of structure that can be known by an intellect. S...

I wouldn't say that 'mind' is a 'function'. Rather something more like an 'inner' aspect of an entity. In other words, you can't detect qualitative ex...

Yes, I know. It seems to me that you're saying that the intelligible structure of the empirical world comes from the interaction between the subject a...

So, you accept the idea that intelligibility doesn't come from the subject?

I should have qualified the impossibility by saying "impossible to know by us" or something like that. I mean, I accept that our knowledge has limitat...

Agreed!

Look, it wasn't my intention to be condenscending, contrarian or whatever. I just believe that in order to understand any philosophical or religious t...

Yes, I agree. In other words, the intelligibility of the world to you is a 'given' that isn't explainable in terms of something more fundamental. Am I...

Personally, I think that I am mind and body. As an analogy, think of a 'plastic bottle'. The 'plastic bottle' is both 'plastic' and 'a bottle'. Neithe...

I might agree with that. But an impossibility to know an explanation isn't a conclusive evidence of an absence of an explanation.

If intelligibility arises from the relation between the world and a certain kind of mind, such a relation is the ground of intelligibility. This, inde...

Yes, Taoism IMO is the closest view to Buddhism non-dualism. As @"Wayfarer" however correctly pointed out there is controversy about how to interpret ...

I see this assertion repeated by Kantians but to be honest this seems to be a distraction. The point isn't finding empirical causes of the categories....

I'm not so sure about this. While God is not seen as an efficient cause of entities, it is seen as their final cause, IIRC. Given this, I'm not sure h...

It is interesting that I am again read as seemingly having an 'agenda' behind my posts. In fact, I am not even a Buddhist and I reject the traditional...

No worries and thanks for the apology. Misunderstanding can happen. I guess that I should also apologize for the tone of some of my comments. Yes, I t...

I wasn't trying to be confrontational or obscure but I can admit that the post you quoted was unclear. So, let me just start by saying that, no, the p...

I would add that perhaps we have different understanding of what physics allows us to know about 'physical reality'. Honestly, I oscillate between an ...

Also @"Wayfarer" This is very similar to Ven Nagarjuna's views (however, Nagarjuna would perhaps disagree that what remains after 'erasing' objectiifi...

:up: We might have a distorted, imperfect knowledge but we are not ignorant. "We see through a glass, darkly" to borrow a Biblical phrase but we are n...

I don't see how this does address my points. What is the source of intelligibility of the empirical world? These 'transcendental' idealist/phenomenolo...

Not sure of what you mean. To me the antinomy suggests that the 'Kantian' view that we can't make ontological theories about what is 'beyond the empir...

I would say I agree if 'suffering' is interpreted as 'suffering as we mean it in our culture' or something like that. Clearly, cessation of 'dukkha' i...

If you believe that wavefunctions are real, you have to somehow explain how physical systems can be in mutually contradictory states simultaneously. T...

My own view is that mind and the body are more like two 'sides of the same coin' rather than two separate things. But, again, there is so much unknown...

Thanks @"J" for the acknowledgment. However, my objection is more 'subtle' as it doesn't rely on a particular scientific theory but a more general pri...

As I said, 'energy' is a property of physical systems. So, it is better to say 'behaviour of matter'. This is IMO unrelated to the point I was making....

Wanted to add that, ironically, while you're right that 'metaphysical naturalism' isn't implied by scientific knowledge alone but it is speculative, a...

Good OP! The main reason why, however, I'm not convinced by this kind of argument is that the existence of individual sentient (or perhaps 'rational')...