Wayfarer

I can still refer to you as being a subject of experience. It's innate to language - 'the subject' is a fundamental component of English grammar. In g...

Sure. But how does that bear on the common-sense observation that a person is the subject of experience? I mean, it is a grammatically correct express...

I can't understand the distinction you're trying to make here. Persons are subjects of experience, are they not? That you and I are both subjects who ...

Anyway - other than the ref to Sisyphus I was going to agree.

studied Camus for the higher school certificate. The only thing I’ve ever read about Camus that made me warm to him was about his split with Sartre..

No, I think he defies them. Wouldn’t be surprised to see them walk out.

Why Sisyphus? Sisyphus is an icon for futility and pointlessness. Sisyphus can’t strive for anything, only repeat the same pointless action forever. ‘...

I picked it up in a podcast about Trump's use of language. Of course. Should be obvious to everyone.

John Cottingham on Wittgenstein's Philosophy of Religion (pdf, 11 pages).

Some feedback: I notice since you've joined that you have a strong tendency to devise your own definitions, interpretations and standards for what con...

So Trump has just well and truly blown up his own campaign again with his dreadful performance at the National Association of Black Journalists in Chi...

Isn't this where the 'transcendental ego' and 'transcendental apperception' figures? As for transcendental apperception: /// The centrality of 'the su...

Thank you once again. I will bring it to bear on the topic of the OP. The basic point of my argument is that we do not really see 'what is'. We're una...

Rachel Maddow points out that Trump has said on a number of recent occasions that ‘I don’t need your votes, we have plenty of votes’. She also notes a...

your claim: I have explained the sense in which the mind is not ‘a thing among other things’. It is perfectly clear. and there you’re referring to the...

The way you see them, anyway….

As I said at the beginning of mind-created world, my argument is perspectival. So long as you’re trying to treat consciousness, or mind, or observatio...

Linde says it changes our perception of what appears to be ‘the past’.

That’s pretty right - I do hold to a form of epistemic idealism. But I also claim that what we can claim is real is inextricably connected to what we ...

Thank you for that question. It is only taken about five years of argument to get to this point. I will carefully compose a response in due course.

*

Bitbol one of the great discoveries I’ve made reading this forum. He’s written a book on Schrodinger’s philosophy of physics, which is a bit difficult...

As did Schrödinger. But it’s metaphysically embarrassing, isn’t it, because it implies the observer, who is not in scope for the objective sciences. (...

that article was specifically about John Wheeler with additional commentary by Andrei Linde. Wheeler is the one known for the participatory universe i...

on second thoughts, don't worry about telling me. But it's worth the read.

This link: Refers to Wheeler's 'Delayed Choice' experiment. I haven't read that particular article, but there's another on Discover Magazine about Whe...

If you look at the OP again, you will notice that I've worded it very carefully. I will draw attention to a specific passage: Beyond that, I'm unwilli...

That explains a lot ;-)

I don't know if 'forbidden' is the right word. There's a relationship between 'subtracting the psychological individual' and the idea of detachment or...

But what can be expressed about anything without bringing a perspective to bear on it? As soon as you start to talk about 'whether the tree falls in t...

A constant reminder that incomprehension of an argument doesn't constitute a rebuttal. I had Parmenides in mind, but obviously a very difficult text t...

I myself never went to a specifically Zen retreat, although I did do others, including the arduous 10-day Goenka retreat in the past. Anyway I don't h...

I never did call it into question. What I call into question is a 'mind independent world'. Reality contains an ineliminable subjective pole or elemen...

Why the scare quotes around reality? At issue is whether the world is mind-independent or is not. You claimed: And I think that what you have in mind ...

I said, in declaring this, you are basically starting that the empirical world is a given, the reality of which can't be called into question. I said ...

You need logic before you can study physics. As was said already. (This incidentally is a cogent argument against physicalism as logic is used to cons...

'Not my will, but thine, oh Lord' is one way of solving that problem. Incidentally I did a search on 'biosemiosis and idealism' which predictably retu...

I'd agree with that, as it has been the practice for every other forum I've joined. I make use of the ability to edit but generally try and observe a ...

Make yourself a coffee. I know you have plenty of cups, even if I can’t see ‘em.

Well, you said: Isn't that just another way of saying that its reality is a given? What else could it possibly mean? But I've already addressed that v...

You'll notice I struck out 'imagined' and replaced it with 'real'. Of course you're defending naive realism. That is made particularly obvious by your...

I don't deny the reality of objects. Heck, I myself have coffee cups, and some of them are in the dishwasher even as I write this. I'm not arguing for...

That was the very point of the passage from Berkeley's dialogues that I provided, in which this exact objection is made to Philonous/Berkeley. Hylas s...

So, the world that you claim exists independently of any interpretation - how do you demonstrate the existence of that?

So please correct this Chat input:

No - because 'the world' that you imagine exists in the absence of any mind, is not 'a world'. The etymology of the noun 'world' comes from an old Eur...

Any interested party, but as I said yesterday, I recognise a brick wall when I see one ;-)

Again, referring to Charles Pinter's book You see, this also provides a plausible grounds for why the 'unreasonable efficiency of mathematics in the n...