180 Proof

And the "sufficient reason" for (every instantiation of) the "PSR" is what exactly? :chin:

:roll: I guess you didn't get the memo, Rogue: There are no antirealists (immaterialists, disembodied minds, etc) in foxholes. :up: :up:

This cannot be repeated enough (esp. here in the effin' United States of Kakistan since 1980) ... :100: :fire:

From what perspective? At what level of analysis? Why not instead: if it's all just quarks ...? C'mon, the premise is weak, reductive nonsense.

Here's a 2022 post from a thread Experience Machine ... https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/655601 A 2024 post from another thread Boeth...

:rofl: Again, "immanent" is "equivalent to" not-immanent (i.e. "transcendent"). Good job! :clap:

From across the pond over here in Kakistan¹ it looks like, iirc, a clusterfuck of knaves: the Royals, Margaret Thatcher, the Tories, Tony Blair's "New...

It seems to me that "faith" in such an abstract, impersonal deity doesn't serve a religious function or even makes sense (despite theology/theodicy).

:up: :smirk:

Yes, from the perspective of eternity (like e.g. Brahmanism), as I understand his thought: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spinoza/#GodNatu or more...

This reminds me of Spinoza's natura naturans, Schopenhauer's World As Will, (Hindu) Brahman or the Dao – even though, in a more pragmatic sense, I pre...

I'm not sure what you're looking for when you write "outline a clearer picture" of "Being" (with respect to "God"?) Please clarify.

:up: :up: :smirk:

Afaik, "sin and sexuality" belong particularly to Abrahamic forms of theism and not to most others like Mesoamerican, Aboriginal, Greco-Roman, Aegypti...

:roll: As always, more of the same, troll is as troll does. My interpretation of cosmogeny from p.1 ... https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comm...

Given that the overwhelming majority of the religious worship "the most crude" forms of theism, we atheists (or, in my case, antitheists) don't bother...

:100: :up:

Westerners worship "the God of Abraham", for instance, rather than a "more sophisticated" god of the philosophers (e.g. "the ground of being", or "bei...

:up:

:up: :up:

Read the OP and the rest (almost all) of this thread. The predominant context within which "faith" has been discussed so far is religious.

What about it? That's nothing to do with the thread topic and mere equivocation. :up: :up:

Your obstinate dismissals without argument, sir, are now dismissed by me without (further) argument. Hopefully, someone much more thoughtful than you ...

And another strawman. :roll: Pay attention, troll ...

Yes, "a personal" objective fact like every physical or cognitive disability; therefore, suffering-focused ethics (i.e. non-reciprocally preventing an...

:smirk:

:up: Red herring. Wayf, you're not one of those evolution-deniers who mischaracterize natural selection as "a process of random chance", are you? http...

Hasty generalization & compositional fallacies. :eyes: What "makes us conscious" is the (rarified) arrangements of our constituent "particles" into ge...

So you believe that there isn't any aspect of suffering that is a fact of the human condition (i.e. hominin species)?

:roll:

Nonsense. Human facticity is not "subjective". Being raped or starved, for example, are not merely "subjective feelings" just like loss of sustanence,...

Semantics.

What is faith? (OP) IME, "faith" is a path (bias/habit à la Žižek's 'ideology') of least cognitive effort: 1. (worldview) folk belief – fantasy – that...

:roll:

"Divine command theory" (defeated by Plato's Euthyphro dilemma, etc).

In fiction ...

:100: :up:

Seems like a (grandiose) composition fallacy to me: atoms which constitute strawberries do not themselves in any way taste, smell or feel like strawbe...

Yes, and they are consistent with, or not excluded by, what Epicurus (or disutilitarianism) says about pleasure as a moral concept and practice. Which...

:rofl: :lol: :sweat: :smirk: :roll: :chin: :sad:

Close enough for this discussion. I don't follow you, Vera. I referred to pleasure as a concept, not particular instances or "experiences" (and "acces...

If so, what is it? (i.e.bad hoc substance(s) like e.g. aether? phlogiston? divine will?) Btw, "the third element" means something other than – more th...

1. What do you mean here by "morality"? 2. In what way does suffering-focused ethics fail to be "objective" (even though, like the fact Earth is round...

:up: :up:

:up: It's less inconsistent and more parsimonious, it seems to me, to conceive of "physical" and "mental" as two properties – ways of describing / mod...

You've omitted Spinoza from your survey of "shiting meanings"; what do you think of his (post-Aristotlean/post-Cartesian) conception of substance? e.g...

:cool: ... just as there is no edge to a sphere, no beginning of a circle (or Möbius loop) and no first random vacuum fluctuation.

:up: :up: Okay, you didn't read the posts or the thread.

Imho, "Skynet" is more likely to save us from our worst selves as a species – a much more complex and interesting problem to solve even for its higher...

:up: