Where did I claim it isn't? I never stated that we do. Please read more carefully. I already have: knowledge of the keyboard I am typing on. Such as "...
Certainly. That I am right now looking at the keyboard I'm typing on is knowledge that is not (consciously) inferred by me from evidence - but, instea...
As the empirically obvious evidence shows, not by me. You so far haven't made any mention of the charading, posturing, lying accusation I just made ag...
Unlike my seeing a moving hand when I look at it, I’m not seeing a mind’s eye in the brain images provided. What I am seeing are individual slides emp...
Since I don’t want to start this debate from scratch, here’s a different, albeit terse, argument: A proposition: No one can in any way see that aspect...
:grin: I like that: converging with one's Jungian shadow in manners that benefits one's own intentions - preferably both short- and long-term. I find ...
Cool. As to my liking for Jung, yea, so so. Some of his concepts are interesting to me - and, maybe even pragmatic in certain contexts for some - but,...
No, not yet at least. I tried Joyce's Ulysses but - just as with Virginia Woolf - though I recognize the genius in the work, it so far hasn't spoken t...
Fair enough! Still, there are some who do maintain that the philosopher, as an individual subject (subjected to the very same world of objects and log...
Couldn't help but given a joyful smile at this. Something about Nietzche's own aphorism of a beast of burden which, upon taking too large of load, tra...
Yes, there most certainly is agreement here. If I were to nitpick, I’ve at least so far found that addressing the totality you've just outlined leaves...
Yes, precisely so. There’s a lot to the link you’ve shared. Descartes was a man in search of infallible knowledge. I’m one to believe such cannot be h...
You’ve addressed my analogy via a literalist interpretation of its parts. And deem this a rational argument against the analogy. Remarkable. The subst...
Yes, apo. You're asking me to define circles so that they have four sides. My very point from the very beginning. Glad we've finally come to an agreem...
Let’s see. You’re laughing because you, in contrast, have certain knowledge of what consciousness is and isn’t in an empirically measurable way. This ...
An unorthodox hypothesis to address your concerns: Suppose that two or more – hence, at least two – instantiations of individuated awareness co-occur....
And how is any awareness of which we can be in any way aware of not a process? Even none-empirical experiences such as those of our own happiness and ...
How can something entirely nonsensical be wrong instead of not even wrong? Back to the drawing board: What’s wrong with “first-person awareness” as a ...
He replieth! What on earth are you talking about??? Other than your ego's need to insult - which does hold semantic value - your expressions are entir...
You belittling insults aside (yes, that apes win by posturing is a fact of nature), how on earth could I when you address the proposition of "I am con...
My own theory of truth in a nutshell: that which conforms to what is actual is true. Prior to you then testing out any and all possible ways this migh...
Honesty is important. For trust and the like. No, you only just gave me your answer right now. Its value here overlooked. To precisely demarcate what ...
Either the extrapolated worldview of the cosmos you endorse is not one of biosemiotics or I stand by what I previously said - so far finding nothing t...
I won’t be much help, and this because I so far find this very quoted affirmation to be nonsensical. Bio-semiotics is the semiotics of life – it addre...
The end never occurs, exists, as an actualized end until the moment its actualized, if this moment ever manifests, true. But the end one pursues will ...
I might come back to this latter on if beneficial. Let me know. Your focus here is on God's desires (which are a part of God - this thought God is sup...
Just saw the video. Very interesting. Still, first off, I’m no expert in the intricacies of modern physics and, secondly, all modern physics is chockf...
Was in a rush with my last post. But regarding God’s intentionality, here’s a maybe better expressed argument: Either a) God intentionally generated a...
That's fare. It was tersely given argument. "It doesn't" to both questions. It only requires that God has goals in what God does. If God does not have...
That's as good an answer as I'll probably get in regard to my question. :grin: Thanks for it. I myself think of this as "Empirical science ignored the...
Even in denying the validity of the argument I've presented against exactly such a "The Great Programmer", you do realize this question can only be an...
Haven't read the entire OP yet, but as to this, the reality of teleology directly contradicts the occurrence of the "God of classical theism". This om...
This goes out to those who are not irreducibly fixated on the unquestionable reality of their own particular worldview, whatever it might be (if any)....
My lack of effort, you say. Alright then. Baby steps. Here's a proposition: "I am conscious of this text." In your worldview, does this proposition ha...
None of that, or at least not necessarily "fundamentally real". The ontic is that which ontology is the study of. That which is actual rather than ill...
I didn't ask "really". I asked "real". As in something that ontically occurs. Not as an idea, but as that which apprehends the idea of consciousness w...
My bad for not clarifying: my last question regarding kindergarten was rhetorical. As to RogueAI asking me, can you not, you know, express your views ...
Maybe you could entice me to. What's an example of something that is not a social construction according to these texts and Vygotskain psychology. Bes...
As someone how holds imperfect knowledge in this realm (in all realms, actually), at this point in our history I find the quoted argument for the most...
Comments