Life isn't the question. That's just confusing the finite with the infinite-- wishing our lives would be a constant, free of change, uncertainty and d...
I'm talking about the infinite of meaning, not any particular state of a person. In chasing the transcendent, one is not directing an action to end th...
Striving-for-nothing is apt, though not in the way you or Wayfayer is talking about it. Eternal recurrence is the infinite meaning of logic reflected ...
We already know the answer to that in metaphysics. It's both. Logically, causality involves states of the world bringing about other states of the wor...
That's not true. Possibility is not actuality. What happens is not a measure of possibility. If that were so, possibility would be incoherent because ...
Experiences are states of the world. That's what it means to be "physical." Not a reduction of one state to another, but to be a state of the world. Y...
They aren't willing to reach for answers though, for any answer is dismissed as inadequate. Whatever we say will be "just a model" and so a failure, e...
That only repeats the error of Plato. The forms of the world are considered an inevitable outcome of enteral logic. But this isn't true. No form of th...
The point is there is no catergory error. Experiences are physical states. They are of the same existence as everything else. Not in the reductive sen...
But that's the problem. The issue isn't a failure to recognise models work, it's the inability to understand the world is acting. In other words, they...
Those who consider there is a "hard problem." Or those who consider descriptions of the world to be talking about something seperate to the world. Mos...
Well, that's actually the problem. Models are considered to have nothing to do with the world, so no casual description will ever make sense. Since ca...
The point is the affect is embodied. It not symbolism which sends and responds to the message. Bodies do that. Without bodies all you have is a meanin...
To put into the context of Beings, the problem is that objectification is located in The Chain of Order, not in Beings that are objects. If something ...
That logic is precisely the problem. Culture and discourse are embodied practices. They formed out of biology interacting with the environment. And ye...
More like you are confusing stated hierarchies with nature: a manifestly grotesque equivocation of the meaning of people and the world with principles...
If that is so, how come you still insist on the 'hard problem?' What is missing in the account which says states of bodies cause states of consciousne...
I'm not talking about the identity of an object though-- the presence or absence of an object isn't its form. My point is the object is material (all ...
Until we start talking about it terms of consciousness. Then you'll insist experiences aren't of the same realm as bodies, speaking as if experiences/...
Language is a feature of sensate bodies. Culture is something human bodies do. So is logical reasoning. Language is an expression of sensate bodies no...
Do you remember our earlier discussion on knowledge in this thread? All sensory knowledge inuited. If I'm to recognise the bookshelf in front of me, I...
So you don't sense pain? Happiness? You don't intuitively feel others have thoughts and feelings? You don't know the child who touches the hot stove w...
It's worth pointing out the influence of this link has greatly diminished in the secular West. Over the last century, in stated philosophy at least, w...
I did in my previous posts: states of conciousness are states of the world, are linked in its causality, making conciousness of the same realm as any ...
Such descriptions are not abstract. In pointing out the connectionss of things in causality, atoms, statues and people, we are doing the opposite of a...
It's not abstractions which are at stake. The failure of the materalist reductionist is to ignore the presence of consciousness and it's relationship ...
Nope. Conscious states are material. They are part of the same world as bodies-- just a different state of the world. "Non-physical" is the immaterial...
For sure, but that only speaks to the problem. Are people formal laws, prime numbers or intellectual objects? What about the rest of our world? No. Th...
The point is that, in considering the "order of nature" to be outside nature, we draw meaning not in terms of the world, but in terms of fictions whic...
Consciousness. A state of the world that is consciousness. No reductionism. No need to be defined by an other terms. I've said in the past that people...
I know you did. That's my point. You always jump to that reductionist position, even though I hand't argued it at all. The idea consciousness would, i...
What else would we have? Anytime we "derive," we are relying on what we already know-- X must mean Y. We can't "derive" without first knowing somethin...
I never said any such thing. States of body cause conocious states is what I argued, not that conocious states were states of body. I'm doing anything...
How is it reductionism to say, for example, that "mystical woo" isn't responsible for consciousness? If I say that states of experience result out of ...
Only because there is a certain reductionism within Derrida's thought. In the eagerness to avoid reduction of meaning to anyone discouse, it leaves to...
Only because you maintain the reductionism of the elimativism/idealism, rather than moving on to a different metaphysic, one which has no interest in ...
Derrida is really an advocate for metaphysics. What he argues against is reduction of the world and logic to a particular discouse. The major point of...
That's precisely the fear and hatred of the world being spoken about. The idea that somehow, states of nature are more than themselves, that they some...
That's not a reductionist argument though. It's a causal one. Rather than precluding the existence of consciousness or saying it's the same as its cau...
Necessity is not in conflict with chaos, but rather an expression of it. Order is not an absence of possibility. It's expressed through it--when the w...
No-one said it was or had to be total. That was your supposition. You're the one who says any prevention of suffering must be total to be effective. H...
I'm talking in the sense of existing without suffering. In the sense of eliminating certain instances of suffering, it can work perfectly well. "Sageh...
It's not about being sages though; that's the illusion of "coping" with suffering talking-- Sagehood and Buddahood are a falsehood. Supposedly, people...
I don't agree with how the question is framed here. Stoicism, in philosophical terms, might ignore suffering (act as if it is not serious), but that's...
Usually, it is the opposite of the pessimist position. Most doctrines of "hope" are built on ignoring or apologising for human suffering. They build t...
The point there is no contradiction: states of causality are without design but the cause. In the end, there is no final cause. Any causal relationshi...
Not particularly telling, given that's true of every study humans have ever carried out. I think we sometimes have a tendency to misuse this sort stat...
"Random change" doesn't mean without cause. It means "without reason." Why is that horses got bigger and bigger? We might say "natural selection" or "...
But it does exist-- there exists an absence of a cup in the cupboard and that presence (non-absence, if you will) is why I'm wrong about the cup being...
Comments