180 Proof

I have already addressed why "lack of belief" is useless:

Consider the following quote from one of the first technoscientists – after von Neumann but before Vinge or Kurzweil – to run through the gedankenexpe...

These semantic muddles are why I prefer the more probative question of Is theism true or not true? rather than merely "Does g/G exist?" If theism is n...

:fire:

A list of 25 (out of 100(?)) of my favorite films in chronological order (only Anglo-American productions, since 1963 'Year of the Rabbit'): 2001: A S...

:cool: :up: (I'll check out Persona which I've never seen.)

:up:

:up:

I thinks it's misaligning expectations with reality that causes, or increases, suffering. 'Truth hurts' only ego and vanity ...

So maybe "the Matrix film" is the blue pill (just as "the Monolith" is the screen – wall of "Plato's Cave" – on which one watches 2001)?

Negation, or denial, of 'an absolute' is a contradiction; so insofar as 'G is absolute', to negate (i.e. deny) G is a contradiction; however, negation...

:yum: Cheers. :chin: Matter constrains life ... Life constrains intelligence ... Intelligence constrains transcension (formerly from 1938, "ephemerali...

Are you familiar with Alain Badiou's 'platonic materialism'? If not, check out The Concept of Model: An Introduction to the Materialist Epistemology o...

:fire: Dao is Logos. ~Heraclitus

I guess that depends on the particular physicalist.

I'm a driver, sir, not a mechanic. :cool:

More like a Mercedes with a busted tranny ... :wink:

You're taking issue with a strawman of your own making, much like theists do with "atheism" and idealists (antirealists) do with "naturalism". I'm not...

:yawn:

There's no "justification" because, to my mind, there is no such animal as a "physicalist ontology". As for your "tennis ball", I rely on an old schoo...

And your point?

:fire:

IME, a thinker's first duty – intellectual hygiene and metacognitive fitness exercise – consists in not asking idle questions or raising paper doubts ...

:up:

None. Physicalism, in practice, is an epistemology (re: a paradigm used in natural science). The question lacks grounds for raising it (Witty, Peirce)...

:ok:

:strong: :sweat:

:ok: I think Plato & Peirce (at least) agree with you.

As per Meinong, multiplicities are real (i.e. exist) and numbers are only abstractions (i.e. subsist), no?

Thus, the a priority of the material (fundamental) and a posteriority of the ideal (emergent).

@"Andrew4Handel" :chin:

Idealism is the philosophy of the subject who forgets to take account of being a body. :eyes:

The way I defined morality in the post you quoted from will do for the sake of this discussion. Why do you believe, Andrew, that nature doesn't ground...

Scientifically-literate dis/believers abductively look for testable explanations within nature.

:roll: :lol:

So nature itself isn't grounds enough for natural beings to conceive of and practice morality (i.e. eusocial cooperation strategies). Why?

You're incorrigibly talking in circles, Andrew. :roll: The quesrion of an 'ultimate explanation', especially in religious terms, is simply incoherent.

:fire: Amen, brother! :100:

Quantum indeterminancy is "all around" every thing (i.e. QFT, quantum fluctuations). This is known with about nine decimal places of precision. Also, ...

:100: "All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone." ~Blaise Pascal

"I don’t want to believe, I want to know." ~Carl Sagan Two questions: 1. Why do you "believe the existence of reality asks for an explanation"? 2. Doe...

Ol' Croz has left the building. 1941-2023 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nS3l_TwPNRY "Long Time Gone" (4:17) Crosby, Stills & Nash, 1969 writer David C...

Survival is a mitzvah. :fire:

Both "Rules" have the same problem of assuming 'preferences for yourself are also the preferences of others'. I second 's substitution: the negative f...

:fire: :death: :flower: Memento mori, mi amigo. Memento vivere! :up: :up:

With respect to your engagement with @"Gnomon"'s notions, I must offer you this caveat, universeness: :victory: :mask:

Right! Only those who want to have children for no other reason but to love them and bring them up strong. My (panglossian) guess is that's only about...

Correction: nature is primarily material, secondarily physical. A metaphysical interpretation, no,

I'd put it this way: we begin as children and need to outgrow 'naivete, ignorance and undisciplined emotional insecurities' in order to become adults ...

:up: This ain't the eithor-or issue that believes it is: preparing ourselves for both 'whether or not to die' and 'how to die once we've had enough' i...