apokrisis

Needless to say I have kids. They are pretty much all growed up. And you will know that the first lesson of having children is to be able to respect t...

Just because "the world" - or the place you happen to live - might be a hard place, doesn't mean you just ought to go along with its ways. So yes of c...

Why is that not what I was discussing? You see a featureless disc. How do you tell if it is spinning or not? Would you see anything different if a sto...

It is the fact that you construct your reality in terms of these binaries which gives the game away. You are having to now justify your Tiger parentin...

Jeez, what a dick. But clearly it simply reflects your own cultural upbringing. You do as was done to you. And so repeateth the cycle of dickery.

But all your comments about quantum physics have been grandly sweeping and lacking in metaphysical precision. That is the substance of my complaint he...

So what's new? Isn't science meant to be self-correcting inquiry in that fashion. You are simply now criticising science because it is in fact epistem...

As soon as you break the symmetry of a circle - put a nick or a mark on its circumference - immediately you can see (from this imperfection) that it h...

...and an invariance is a symmetry. So everyone is talking about the same thing, sort of. But there is a historic division between those who think abo...

It's not that difficult. If you want to talk about actual circles, then the form of a perfect circle represents their exceptionless limit. So it is wh...

Which is why fundamental is a word that a process metaphysician would only use in quotes. An ontology of self-organising habits sees everything as ins...

The circle simply illustrates the basic principle that a symmetry is defined by differences not making a difference. Unlawfulness comes in once we sta...

Huh? Our measures of reality now have such precision that we can even measure the residual indeterminacy that persists despite our living in an era wh...

You mean history has shown that our scientific models just keep getting remarkably more comprehensive in scope. Our ability to describe the world accu...

The second law of thermodynamics is the obvious one. Of course the second law is itself framed rather mechanically in terms of reversible Newtonian mo...

You can take it personally but it was the collective "you" I was addressing. Again, on what grounds - except a belief that time symmetric laws support...

I prefer to get beyond such claims of definiteness. You can't be radically indefinite unless you abandon a lack of beginning along with the beginning ...

Nice question. I really like Paul Davies but that column is mix of the good and bad. The way I would look at it is that the fundamental laws describe ...

As you can see from the confusion of replies, you are asking for a simple definition of something that has irreducible complexity. The essential idea ...

But only as conceived in terms of relata like points and lines. Or at a deeper level - one that includes the reality of material being. - in terms of ...

This is all pretty compatible with my triune metaphysics which would call the noumenal a vagueness - a naked unformed potentiality. The noumenal would...

I'm confused about exactly what you want to argue. But it seems reasonable to derive the least action principle from empirical experience of the world...

So does this then boil down to either all similarities being a matter of accident vs all differences being a matter of accident? If so, less Metaphysi...

So what are we experiencing when we employ gravitational lensing to see distant planets circling distant stars? - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravit...

I would say that aletheist has it bang on so far. So it is a shame to see you capitulate this way given the thread has been pretty instructive. Alethe...

That is certainly right. But it illustrates the bigger issue of how logic relates to the world - which you, as a student of Popper, would understand. ...

Yep and yep. This is the tricky bit. I think you may be arguing towards the subjective as being real, and indeed the ultimately real. And I can't deny...

Out of curiosity, how do you deal with ontic uncertainty? Do you treat vagueness and propensity as elements of reality? Would you go as far as extendi...

Yep. It's the "living in a bubble" effect - zeroing in on the particular human weakness of confirmation bias. People will swallow your lies if they ar...

I see the joke. But also the issue of the aha! sensation was largely the subject of my first book. And Peirce came along about 20 years later for me. ...

Brain scans reveal that in fact humans need a team of such beings to execute all their various functions. https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/a5...

Who is this "my" you speak of? I only see a reductionist accumulation of cells.

Why would you think that is what I said? As Rich says, we can certainly treat our own freewill as a constraint over our actions and their intended out...

Yep.

So by choice ... one simply chooses not to have freewill and the constraints are thus rendered an abstract illusion that you never really took serious...

What do you want? That I should invent some completely different metaphysical system for every post? Logic is like water to fish. Because most folk on...

After a few hour in a sensory deprivation tank, people can lose their minds and feel like they cease to exist. So there is good neurocognitive evidenc...

So they can't choose not to suffer the consequences? The consequences are thus quite real as the corollary of their choices. It is all a bit like choo...

That's Peircean abduction - the leap which can be recognised as already the coherent answer as it is still crisply forming. And it can be explained ne...

Well, for a start you made a huge swerve and avoided my actual question about unicorn dung. Let's see how you would run the actual argument I posed to...

Of course it is bloody relevant. And who is this mysterious "they"? Why are you being so shifty here? I've already explained why it doesn't have to fo...

As I said, I can't agree or disagree with the "not even wrong". It doesn't even achieve the threshold of intelligibility. But if you want to now flesh...

Yep. I get you don't see it and likely never will. So there are freely chosing individuals and then ... somehow ... the separate thing of a common goa...

Well they are. One is coherent, and the other incoherent (according to the position I have taken on physicalist explanation). Again, my position is di...

In practice.

I'm losing interest if you are going to start pretending there is no causal issue regarding mind~matter dualism. Again, the incoherence of dualism sta...

I think you skipped over the crucial bit - if it can be measured. So in the end, physicalism reduces to pragmatism.

Quit being an idiot. You said reductionism vs holism lacked rigorous definition. I supplied my rigorous definition. You started bleating in irrelevant...

So again, what is the causal connection? I myself prefer the dichotomy of mind and world as its speaks to the semiotic modelling relation that is our ...

So what are you calling yourself and what is its rigorous definition?