Philosophim

Alright Ucarr, we've been back and forth over this for days now and I'm consistently seeing that you're not interested in discussing anymore as you're...

No, I'm saying that we have no way of empirically verifying or countering the proposal here, so all we're left with is logic. Yes. This is now a possi...

Ucarr, we both know you're trying to make this a set issue right? Stop insulting my intelligence and goodwill. Read the OP and use scope in relation t...

Exactly! And if we don't agree, who cares as long as it was a fun conversation right? Yes, truth is used slightly differently depending on the context...

Oh, no worry! In the future if you haven't completely answered everything you intended to, let me know a the bottom so I can wait until you're finishe...

Wonderful post. Just had to comment. :)

I already told you I'm not going to debate 'zero' with you. There are certain things so far outside of a discussion they can be dismissed, and this is...

No. See past posts for what that means. And again, if a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, it still falls and vibrates the air. This is my ...

Zero is a number, or a word that represents the concept of 'nothing'. The argument for and against zero has long been settled. Yes Ucarr, we can creat...

That's for you to explain. I'm not using scope with existence and it doesn't make any sense to me. Yes that is a fair point. My intention was to conve...

I do as well, but the best we can do in that is use knowledge. You might want to check out my post here https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/1404...

There is a classic mistake that is often made in using the term objectivity. Objectivity and subjectivity refer to knowledge, but sometimes they are c...

First, a fantastic post and analysis! I rarely get this deep of an analysis, I'll hopefully rise to the occasion. Correct. What is 'impossible' cannot...

Language can also capture concepts and negations. This is similar to people being against the idea of the number 0 when it was first introduced. Are y...

Thank you for the conversation and your insights. :)

Things like sights and sounds. Because the physical is obviously capable of being conscious. You are conscious and physical. Therefore the physical ca...

And where have I failed to do this? You say, "What caused it?" and I answer, "Nothing, its uncaused." You ask, "How does the shift work?" The answer i...

If my argument is correct, then the principle of sufficient reason does not apply to the question of existential origin. It still holds other than thi...

A mind is a resulting process of sensory inputs and decisions. The mind can be intelligent, unintelligent, conscious, or unconscious. Merely physical?...

I don't understand the question. There was nothing, then something. There's nothing to evaluate besides the fact there was nothing prior. My apologies...

Then just use the meaning and don't introduce new terms. "Scope" as you defined there is not the same as 'scope' as I defined it with causality. You p...

No, the mind is a result of the brain, not equal to it. Is a fire equal to the sticks its on? But a fire must have a medium to burn and cannot exist w...

Ok, and the word 'unrestricted' is defined as having no restrictions. This is a silly argument that I'm not going to spend any more time on. No, I'm n...

Its uncaused. So there is nothing that causes it to change. This is the part I get you're having trouble with. Let me translate your question. "You sa...

Ha ha! Look, I get it. We all get supremely frustrated with other people and posters some time, it happens. We're all people here and we've likely all...

Hey, you need to lay off the language and insults like that. We're glad to have your ideas and thoughts and its ok to slip up here and there, but make...

MoK, the problem with your argument is that it ignores basic science about the brain. Your mind is caused by your brain. That's a pretty well establis...

Make sure it avoids conspiracy theories and has standards for posting.

If its a good one, yes. :)

How do you tell what is real while awake? Lets use sight. Light floods into your eye, hits a nerve, which sends electrical signals to your brain. Your...

The context is the OP. If there is something I am saying that is unclear, please ask me to clarify as I've attempted to. The evaluation is the OP. Its...

Maybe. The problem is we're talking about universal origins, and we're talking about theory, not fact. For all we know its possible that there is some...

Ok, so you admit that I don't use the phrase "Scope of existence". I also cannot read your mind and noted, "I don't know what you mean by 'scope of ex...

And we would still ask, "What caused that to exist?" The answer is always the same in the end of the causal chain. An interesting point. But we can im...

My point was you kept using phrases like "scope of existence" and "Plays within The universe". These phrases could mean anything and need more detail....

I never use the phrase scope of existence anywhere in that quote. I don't know what you mean by it. I talk about the scope of causality. You have intr...

If you haven't read this section, do so now. https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/480/site-guidelines-note-use-of-ai-rules-have-tightened You are...

To help you do better on these forums, feel free to address my points here instead of a personal opinion you have about my character.

Thinkers just debate logical arguments. Debating what we should call a thought process like 'process philosophy' is a waste of time. Either the argume...

Yes, I am not using set theory. That's why I'm telling you that the 'set' example is not the argument, just an example to help you understand. The arg...

First, you don't have to do anything in life. Amputate your arm if you wish. Snort cocaine. Beat your head into a wall until you crush your nose into ...

Yes. I don't know or care. The set is a tool to help you understand the concept, not a mathematically rigid logical model. No, I'm just talking about ...

Obviously you're not interested in this discussion. Another day and another post then.

I think we're having a semantic disagreement. Let me be more specific and you can describe it in whatever terms you would like. Lets say that science ...

I am saying that existence encapsulates everything that is. "Existences" are subdivided quantifications of existence. My note is that if you increase ...

Causality is why it is what it is. If we have captured causality that is real, then it is true.

Look, I think climate change denialists should take half of their brain out of their head, make a smoothy out of it, then drink it. I think they're so...

Suspicious page alert Banno.

Not a worry Bob! We may not agree on these points but I always respect your honest engagement and viewpoint.

Bob I'm not even too sure where to start with this one at this point. I feel you keep making this needlessly complicated and introducing aspects that ...