Tom Storm

Nice response - common sense defended. The National Enquirer magazine's slogan used to be, 'Enquiring minds want to know.' Dressing up yellow journali...

That's a good point. Although hopefully one is getting closer to the best possible version of reality (whatever that might be), or why bother? I would...

I'm thinking of starting a threat that proves Yahweh/God is real because quantum mechanics was predicted in Bible prophesy - taking Genesis, you just ...

Yes, this one simple statement encapsulates a key problem. What hope for a shared notion of common good when agreement on first principles seems unach...

In fairness to atheists, the more sophisticated kind do not make a positive claim about God's non-existence. That would require proof. The more nuance...

Agree. A succinct, no bullshit view.

Your whole paragraph is typed in bold - this is not 'just a question' for you. You are VERY preoccupied by totalitarianism. Why is that?

I have no idea what this means but it looks great. My favourite ism is antidisestablishmentarianism.

I get that. In the 1970's people heavily into pacifism would often say, without irony, 'I'm not into ism's, Man,... peace.' They thought isms were bad...

It's funny how 'ism' has long had such totemic power . But if most isms are beliefs would we bother to say there is no escape from beliefs or worry ab...

Huh? Sounds like I missed an exciting debate on here about totalitarianism. I looked, vainly trying to find what you were referring to but it seems to...

Reminded of what specifically? That some prefer Nazism to Communism based on that childish nugget? Or that Communism kills people? Surely this is the ...

How so?

This may need tidying up, but Scientism (philosophical naturalism) should be separated from that which says methodological naturalism is the most reli...

:cool:

That works for me.

While the devotees of higher awareness often disparage the limited vision of science, they seem to be the first to reach for science (through speculat...

This is not a helpful observation; it provides almost no insight. Firstly - was it a competition? Secondly, Communism lasted decades, Nazism just over...

On the same theme, there may also be something to be said for people doing bad things when they are damaged.

It's a definition, sure. But more like a journalist's (narrow) definition than a philosophical one. Are you saying evil can't happen if the protagonis...

I'm hearing a lot of echos of Jordan Peterson around these parts.

So you have defined what evil is. You're not really asking anyone else.

Thanks Jordan Peterson. Say hi to Tammy. :joke:

Evil? Maybe not. Confused, lost, broken, fractured.... These may explain the above rather than evil per say. Is the action evil or the person who does...

Good and evil seem to me to be almost indefinable theological categories. I don't know many people who think they are good. I think more accurately pe...

I am not sure who I find more boring Marx or Hegel. I have never been able to get though either. But both are significant figures in philosophy. Here'...

Sure. And? The idea that we do not have access to absolute truth or certainty is common enough: fallibilism. But anyone can say D may have made a mist...

:up:

:up:

I think he's an anti-ism-isamist I studied Jungianism and Mythos so, perhaps not. "ism" is just a bit of language, a suffix, which people associate wi...

Fair enough. Well there are versions of the above that are morally wrong in less dramatic ways. Gay-hating Pentecostal Christianity, for instance. Is ...

All we can do here is go with a common sense approach. If a pathway involves gassing people - I think we can safely say it is wrong. If it involves ha...

I'm not sure you can say this. Are you saying it is impossible to follow a wrong approach?

Agree. And many people follow a tradition or therapy mode for many years without any changes or results.

Ok. I prefer who you can be. Who you are implies some kind of essence or truth. Not that this matters two shits... :smile:

Not saying there is no 'you' as such, I'm proposing there is no real you 'who you are' in your words. There are just better or worse functioning versi...

I'm not so sure there is a you to become exactly. But some people can sure make improvements in how they manage their lives. This can be done in many ...

Which doesn't sound especially attractive or interesting.

Yes, a lot of money has been made by therapists who have peddled worldviews and 'therapeutic' ideas with not a lot of evidence to support the efficacy...

I simply meant the common place observation that you can't use science to assess sages. Wayfarer calls science a blunt tool which I think it not quite...

It may solve the problem of consciousness theoretically but will it be true and how can that be demonstrated?

That's a pretty good line.

Beautifully put.

I hear you but I'm not sure we often encounter people who hold to such a rigid form of empiricism.

That is one view. But I prefer a version of naturalism/physicalism that says this is all we know for now. It's not making proclamations about what is ...

I dontl think it is interesting. But thanks for your politeness.

Well, we all know the various theories we can adopt here. But the matter or realism versus idealism doesn't interest me much. I'll take quantum waves ...

Got ya. Thanks. My mind doesn't process the notion of a thing in itself. For me there are physical objects and my senses and that's about it.

Hollywood and the studio system is long gone, as is that worldview. There are other systems and worldviews in operation.

Can you expand on this?