Philosophy Now Forum

Lately there were controversies on whether the mind is physical or not. What is Mind? The mind is the set of faculties including cognitive aspects such as consciousness, imagination, perception, thinking, intelligence, judgement, language and memory, as well as noncognitive aspects such as emotion ...

The totality of FSKs dependent on one another results in a cycle.

Yet there is a logic behind how the creator creates. If you are going to allude it, specify the logic. The individuation of one assertion to another with the cycling of said assertions into newer forms which are empty in themselves given they are dependent upon another form from which to progress. ...

The concept of the perfect circle continually repeats across multiple observers thereby making the perfect circle infinite. But concepts only started with human beings, and thus the concept of the perfect circle 'had to' also have a start, and therefore could not be infinite. It is the continual re...

The simple point is there is no a point-in-itself. The point is there is no thing-in-itself that exists absolutely independent from the human conditions. As such, the extreme contention is, there are no pre-existing moon, sun or stars before there were humans. As long as you are assigning a "thing"...

The concept of the perfect circle continually repeats across multiple observers thereby making the perfect circle infinite. It is the continual repetition of a phenomenon which makes it infinite. For example a continually progressive function of the number line necessitates 1 existing in perpetual v...

Your above are merely words and statements. Prove your thing-in-itself exists as real? A simple point is a thing in itself. The simple point is there is no a point-in-itself. The point is there is no thing-in-itself that exists absolutely independent from the human conditions. As such, the extreme ...

Yet the creator is defined by a source of logic as to what it is/is not/maybe. Doesn't have to be. Logic is just one of the many things the creator created. Logic and creation coexist side by side. That wasn't always true. Yet there is a logic behind how the creator creates. Yes, No, maybe, 1, 0, p...

The repetition of patterns necessitates forms as things in themselves. The branching of a tree, veins, rivers, or lighting necessitates the repetition of a branching form which mirrors itself through further states. The nature of repetition necessitates one thing existing through many, with the one ...

The repetition of patterns necessitates forms as things in themselves. The branching of a tree, veins, rivers, or lighting necessitates the repetition of a branching form which mirrors itself through further states thus are a thing in themselves. The nature of repetition necessitates one thing exist...

So, in the EXAMPLE which we are talking about, which was; "I am conscious of observing an apple, but then I look at at orange", what action and form have 'I', supposedly and allegedly, changed into and from EXACTLY in this provided EXAMPLE, which you are DIRECTLY responding to anyway, by the way? A...

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:52 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:43 am Yet logic is used to define what the programmer is/is not/maybe

It isn't. The creator of logic came before logic.

Yet the creator is defined by a source of logic as to what it is/is not/maybe.

Logic and creation coexist side by side.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:21 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:39 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:56 am
Your view are off target.

No a thing in itself is that which repeats as a point of change to some other phenomenon.

Your above are merely words and statements.
Prove your thing-in-itself exists as real?

A simple point is a thing in itself.

The phenomenon is an emergence thus real when verified and justified empirically and philosophically. For the ignorant, the thing-in-itself, i.e. the noumenon is the basis of the phenomenon but that is not true. No, it is real as observed through its emergence. What is observed is merely the phenom...

What has the 'I' here, supposedly and allegedly, changed into, and from, EXACTLY? It has changed into the action and form which it has committed. So, in the EXAMPLE which we are talking about, which was; "I am conscious of observing an apple, but then I look at at orange", what action and form have...