Entanglement =/= "instant communication" (or communication of any kind). E.g. Two opaque envelopes are sealed wherein one contains a dollar bill and t...
I have asked you to physically square the supernaturalistic circle, so to speak, and you've not done that. If I was merely "dismissing ... as fiction"...
Non sequitur again. A further example of us talking past each other – I'm talking about the problematic implications of your speculative claims with r...
Well, as a dialectical counterpoint to ' re: Zappa's anti-pop :wink: OTD 60 years ago, another brand new release in the US ... https://youtu.be/iNCjPk...
I don't know. I don't know. You tell me, ucarr. The term "cosmic sentience" seems to me oxymoronic. Yes, either net increase or net decrease. No. I've...
No. Yes. I'm talking about known physics and, as far as I'm concerned, you are not. N/A I think you're claiming that the universe is not causally clos...
@"Bret Bernhoft" :point: Well, I find Spinoza's non-transcendent substance, or natura naturans, much more parsimonious and elegant (as do e.g. Hegel, ...
Well, I haven't been a humanist since Old World conquistadors and colonial settlers genocided New World peoples and built empires via the Atlantic sla...
No thanks. We're now talking past each other (and neither of us are physicists anyway). I'm no longer interested in what I thought you were saying abo...
You're speculating outside of known physics (i.e. absent a falsifiable theory of QG) yet I'm asking you to reconcile known physics with another specul...
I don't think so. QM suggests that "distance" – spacetime (i.e. gravity) – does not obtain at planck scales. Conservation laws, derived from Noether's...
Change is inevitable, "progress" is not (and fleeting, or fragile, when attained). IMO, "true socialism" is – has always been – incompatible with scar...
Why do you (seem to) equate "incompleteness" with "openness"? For instance, a transcendental number such as Pi is closed (i.e. defined) even though it...
"What is real?" My guess – Horizons. Ineluctable relations (i.e. whatever is hazardous to ignore ... that which is the case whether or not we know (or...
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/835493 Continuing from the post linked above, @"Bob Ross", tell me what is "subjective" about the fo...
:up: :up: In other words, you believe that reality is also "immaterial"? If so, how does the immaterial affect the material and vice versa? Give a cou...
Putin's Bitch definitely won't be the GOP nominee, Sleepy Joe might not be on the ballot either and I haven't seen a thing in the last seven or so mon...
:fire: "Family and saving Grace" also traumatize many in various ways which drive them into a "life without purpose" of "catering to one's impulses" v...
"Everything" which causes changes is material, ergo "energy" is material, no? How can "a beyond" the here and now provide "something better" to us wit...
So to paraphrase in Schopenhauerian terms: "everything that exists" is phenomenal, or only appearances (i.e. Representations), but "existence itself" ...
Here is what I actually wrote if you care to critically assess my legalistic analogy instead of ToothyMaw's "stupid" (lazy) strawman: https://thephilo...
IIRC, either Pythagoras or Plato has a stronger claim than Berkeley to being "the father of idealism in general" (in the western philosophical traditi...
:up: In a similar sense as @"FrancisRay"'s question: How can we know that what we "experience as God" is in fact "God" (especially if "God" is not one...
I can't follow your inconsistencies, Bob. Mind is non-being? Ergo, "mind (at-large)" is being? This account reminds me of Berkeley's subjective ideali...
I think both are distinctions without explanatory or ontologucal differences. The link provided, IMO, renders each functionally redundant in the 'cosm...
:chin: In other words, Okay, as far as it goes; but it seems to me that Occam's Razor dispenses with ad hoc – unwarranted – notions like "panpsychism"...
Comments