You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Tom Storm

['Member']Joined: February 24, 2021 at 20:37Last active: February 25, 2026 at 20:3218 discussions10889 comments
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Bio

I never paid much attention to philosophy over the years and I'm here to see what I might have missed.

I'm not here to defend any particular commitments, but I might sometimes challenge ideas against some known criticisms (which I may not personally hold) to see how well they stand up. This is not intended as sophistry but as an attempt to probe the robustness of beliefs.

Mostly I'm interested in positive conversations and understanding what people believe and why. Sometimes, differing foundational assumptions (worldviews) mean we talk past each other. When conversations stops being constructive, I think it's reasonable to end them.

Discussions (18)

Fear of Death

March 27, 2023 at 19:07 88 comments General Philosophy

Comments

In: When All Else Fails, Destroy Truth  — view comment
You make some familiar points, inasmuch as I’ve heard these observations from commentators and friends here in Australia. I think some people would ra...
February 23, 2026 at 07:53
In: Origin of the Left-Right Political Spectrum  — view comment
MAGA is largely a nostalgia project, isn’t it? I guess they would most like the post-war period, but their view is likely not to be grounded in a real...
February 22, 2026 at 20:23
In: What would be a philosopher of center  — view comment
Pope? Catholic pope? Not often at the centre, whether you think of the right-wing anti-communist John Paul or the progressive Francis. Popes, like any...
February 21, 2026 at 22:13
In: Michel Bitbol: The Primacy of Consciousness  — view comment
That's exactly what I was trying to get at. Thanks.
February 21, 2026 at 22:06
In: Michel Bitbol: The Primacy of Consciousness  — view comment
yes this much I get. But: Can we ever say we experience experience? Isn’t consciousness always in relationship to something else?
February 21, 2026 at 02:28
In: Michel Bitbol: The Primacy of Consciousness  — view comment
Would you say the term participatory realist still describes him? Bitbol clearly identifies that scientific knowledge depends on the conditions of par...
February 21, 2026 at 00:52
In: Direct realism about perception  — view comment
Nicely worded and astute.
February 19, 2026 at 02:28
In: Can Philosophical Counselling supercede other established form?  — view comment
Your language seems vague to me. Most counselling in the West is designed to support the client to develop insights into their beliefs and behaviors. ...
February 18, 2026 at 20:06
In: Incorrectly warned  — view comment
I wonder if this kind of thing is for others to judge. But who knows? In life I’d guess I’m not much like I am here. I expect many people are often ni...
February 18, 2026 at 19:26
In: Existence and Reality  — view comment
:up:
February 18, 2026 at 10:33
In: Existence and Reality  — view comment
No need to be defensive. I was very clear to put in option 1.
February 18, 2026 at 10:27
In: Existence and Reality  — view comment
An excellent response, Wayfarer. And there are really just three responses possible: 1) Do the hard work and study thinkers who have effectively thoug...
February 18, 2026 at 06:39
In: Honoring Soul's Integrity  — view comment
I’m not sure I find the poetic language helpful. For me this seems a bit muddled. How is “the very essence of your self?respect” different from simply...
February 17, 2026 at 21:10
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Yes. I heard Hilary Lawson explain his view (derivative, I know) that meaning does not map onto the world. Instead, meaning is a human construction, s...
February 16, 2026 at 21:12
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Yes, this much I get. But to posit it isn’t possible for physical processes to explain intentionality, I wonder if this is a question for expertise ra...
February 16, 2026 at 19:57
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I really just wanted to see what others thought, to be honest, because it seems so simple and avoids all the usual banalities about the nature of cons...
February 16, 2026 at 19:20
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
But isn't the view that numbers are idealizations we construct that stabilize the world into convenient, standardized identities, somewhat inimical to...
February 15, 2026 at 23:07
In: Omnipresent, core descriptors of cyberpunk philosophy  — view comment
I’ve always taken cyberpunk to be an aestheticized form of postmodernism that riffs off Weber’s idea of disenchantment, the sense that modernity drain...
February 15, 2026 at 22:27
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
No. Some arguments that theists raise are self?contained. All the theist has to demonstrate in this instance is that intentionality can’t be explained...
February 15, 2026 at 22:04
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Fair question. So if the essence of things is open and continually shaped by the conditions in which they appear to us, then objectivity cannot be a f...
February 15, 2026 at 21:52
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I'm not sure how evolution can explain intentionality, but I'm no expert. I don't remember the context of my question. It was probably to understand w...
February 15, 2026 at 20:57
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I am rarely offended. The point of this thread was to understand Hart’s reasoning. What does he mean? Is the reasoning any good? That’s the main thing...
February 15, 2026 at 20:21
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Good. Nice.
February 15, 2026 at 06:31
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I'm interested to read what @"joshs" has to say about this.
February 14, 2026 at 22:30
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
@"Joshs" I’m wondering if you could help me articulate a position I have some interest in but can’t fully articulate. The idea that mathematics descri...
February 14, 2026 at 22:17
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
All I did was ask the question, "How do we know...? why would you jump straight to me being not OK with something? A post-modern view of mathematics w...
February 14, 2026 at 21:49
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
To be clear, it's not actually my view as such, I'm trying to put forward what post modern perspectives seem to be saying. Although I am sympathetic a...
February 14, 2026 at 21:36
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
That's an interesting comparison. I'm not sure if I would have put those two ideas together, but I see what you mean. Both appear to be unverifiable. ...
February 14, 2026 at 21:26
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I'm not confident of this. Saying that maths must be independent of us because it leads to discoveries and technology doesn’t really settle the issue....
February 14, 2026 at 06:45
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Cool. We mostly agree. Curious, if someone tells you there are ghosts, is your response: Bullshit: science hasn’t demonstrated their existence and sou...
February 14, 2026 at 01:28
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I agree but I would just say that science is a reliable pathway to doing/achieving things in the world. But it makes no truth proclamations and provid...
February 14, 2026 at 00:38
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
No. How do we know that what we call reality and math’s aren’t simply the contingent products of cognition, culture and language. In other words the p...
February 14, 2026 at 00:32
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Not odd to me, I suspect most people are drawn to philosophy to find “better” justifications for what they already believe. It’s hoarding weapons and ...
February 14, 2026 at 00:27
In: Do unto others possibly precarious as a moral imperative  — view comment
I agree. I should have said a more comprehensive account.
February 13, 2026 at 02:40
In: Do unto others possibly precarious as a moral imperative  — view comment
Yep, that’s pretty much how I understand the maxim. We need to remember that no one sentence formula is going to articulate a full account of morality...
February 13, 2026 at 01:57
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I’m not sure I agree. I take something closer to Susan Haack’s view of what counts as a scientific approach. Methods that have been established within...
February 13, 2026 at 00:13
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Interesting. Do you think many scientists identify as anti?realists, and also as Kantians, understanding space and time as forms of cognition rather t...
February 12, 2026 at 22:02
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
You’re right. Axiom may not be the right term. But it is a metaphysical presupposition. There are others, like causation and the idea that the world i...
February 12, 2026 at 19:47
In: The real problem of consciousness  — view comment
I’m not convinced that’s how it goes. It seems closer to this: if you are a naturalist or physicalist, how do you account for intentionality? Does you...
February 12, 2026 at 06:15
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
For me what remains interesting is that science is built upon philosophical axioms ( e.g., reality can be understood) and how strongly these are belie...
February 12, 2026 at 05:01
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I would. But perhaps you’re saying that’s not how you see yourself in relation to a claim like: ‘science is what we arrive at when philosophy has been...
February 12, 2026 at 02:20
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I think this a position often held by positivists. Russell makes similar points about philosophy: Some people hold a view that philosophy is merely sp...
February 12, 2026 at 01:56
In: Is Objective Morality Even Possible from a Secular Framework?  — view comment
I have never really heard an account of God that demonstrates how God is good. I see no good reason to take a theistic morality seriously. Apart from ...
February 11, 2026 at 23:53
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Interesting. Thanks for the overview. Would you say that puts you within a camp that is broadly sceptical of metaphysics and more closely aligned with...
February 11, 2026 at 23:12
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Yes, that’s mostly it. The point of this thread, as I mentioned a few times in only to understand the argument being made, which I have tried to do. W...
February 11, 2026 at 20:34
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Indeed, "Shut up and calculate". Although it seems to me that Hart isn’t saying "it's not going to work", he is identifying that a particular presuppo...
February 10, 2026 at 03:11
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Nice - that's also a point I made earlier. We can set aside the Neoplatonism and admire the construction of his argument. Indeed. And sometimes it see...
February 09, 2026 at 21:35
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I think that’s a superficial description, which I’ve already addressed. The point is: can naturalism account for intentionality? Forget God: what can ...
February 09, 2026 at 20:57
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
I really appreciate your responses here. Yes, good. What's your reaction to this point? And I think this may be the best distillation of what it all m...
February 09, 2026 at 20:27
In: Intelligibility Unlikely Through Naturalism  — view comment
Nice work and thank you for the effort. It's all a bit too deep, too complex for me. Yes. What do you make of the argument? Given the potential proble...
February 09, 2026 at 19:18
⇧