Philosophy Now Forum

There is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta ... Believing that one's ignorance of something is some kind of understanding is absurd. Just because you do not know what a quantum state is, does not mean there is not one. There are lots of t...

Mind intervenes when the matter is in an undecided state. So you are saying mind doesn’t behave according to laws of nature?. Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature. Can you give examples of where matter is in an undecided state and mind intervenes, producing m...

bahman wrote: ↑Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:48 pm Mind intervenes when the matter is in an undecided state.

So you are saying mind doesn’t behave according to laws of nature? Can you give examples of where matter is in an undecided state and mind intervenes, producing matter acting not according to natural laws?

In the time that this was written, humans were becoming bored of this endless and pointless loop of arguing. Do we even remember the last conversation that didn’t involve arguing about arguing? Very much like that book simulacrum and simulacra. There is nothing left of substance here. Time to move on.

This may have already been brought up in the prior 18 pages, but, what if we reverse the topic question. Does reality affect thoughts? Undoubtedly yes. If they didn’t, we would have no thoughts, or their contents would in no way reflect reality. So then, yes, thoughts must then be able to affect rea...

I'm not convinced of either premise. Is perception really discrete or is that just how we experience it? Is experience really continuous or is that just how we perceive it? We have two things perception which starts with the activation of the sensory system by the packet of lights. Then our nervous...

other means of knowing can be necessary to get at the truth Okay, so what can we glean from... we know the sensory organs transduce...light into neural impulses, and...we know those neural impulses get process(ed) in the visual cortex, which it is supposed where the representation is occurring ...m...

Again, you are forgetting the human being prior to this has been operating on the assumption that a real world does exist, that their mental representations have, up to this point, allowed them to interact with other seeming individuals, to navigate and manipulate the world, Those assumptions are c...

Come on. I just want you to answer whether you're saying one thing over the other. It's important to clarify this, to make sure that you're really understanding what the one side is claiming. Also, it's not a matter of "excluding science from the discussion." It's a matter of what's logic...

other means of knowing can be necessary to get at the truth Okay, so what can we glean from... we know the sensory organs transduce...light into neural impulses, and...we know those neural impulses get process(ed) in the visual cortex, which it is supposed where the representation is occurring ...m...

Insofar as what you're aware of/what's present to your consciousness, yes. Again, logically, there are two options here: Insofar as what's present to your consciousness, what you're actually aware of it's either: (a) a mental creation, or it's mental phenomena per se OR (b) it's not a mental creati...

It necessarily amounts to (or "reduces to") solipsism, as I've been explaining--that's the whole point. Given the claim, there's no way out of this upshot. This is the case for idealism in general. Anything other than solipsism on those views has to be purely a faith-based belief. Are you...

Your understanding of representationalism seems more akin to a kind of epistemological solipsism. That is not the claim of indirect realism. It necessarily amounts to (or "reduces to") solipsism, as I've been explaining--that's the whole point. Given the claim, there's no way out of this ...

This is probably the most important part here. I explained this earlier in the thread a number of different times, in a number of different ways. I'll explain it again. Logically, there are two different things we can be claiming in this context: Either (A) Our conscious awareness is ONLY awareness...

I need you to explain what you mean by ‘awareness of externals as such’, and how and why this is not possible, given our current scientific understanding of perception. Do you mean, direct access to the world? If that is your meaning, I agree with THIS statement. This is probably the most important...