Philosophy Now Forum

A tla wrote Due to unusual circumstances I wrestled with unusual states of mind for decades, I know more about mental phenomena than you ever will. You can't tell this about me because I usually write similar to a materialist. I know for a fact that phenomenology is little more than a gimmick for pe...

Atla wrote Pseudo-objective theories of everything (not dependent on personal psychology and opinion), not talking about foundations. I said several times that it's pretty basic philosophy that there is no true objective foundation of things. Not in science, not in phenomenology. I don't know why i...

Atla wrote Pure analytics - lacks the direct subjectivity, the immediate experience of life's joys and sorrows and all else. Pure experience - lacks the great objective theories of the world that try to explain it all. Philosophy to me doesn't even really begin until we've unified these approaches ...

Atla wrote Like what? The truth is that you think that torturing a child is bad, because it's always bad for YOU. Same here, torturing a child is always bad for me. We have empathy. But we are doing philosophy here, not personal psychology. Nothing about the world is intrinsically good/bad or ethic...

Atla wrote There are no ethical absolutes, you can't be serious about this. I'm a sadistic psychopath God, I have time to torture up to 1000 children a day, before I start raping the virgins. Whether one child suffers shortly, or a thousand children suffer for eternity, makes no absolute difference...

Atla wrote No idea what presence you are talking about. I've checked for absolute presence many times and found none, I only found illusions of absolute presence. 'Logic' typically refers to what normally formed human males do with their left hemispheres, and most women genuinely can't follow it. I...

Atla wrote I spent most of my life looking for answers, and think that you are misguided. You wanted a simple and dramatic answer, but ethics is also irrelevant in the grand scheme. There is nothing to explore there for me, except the psychology of annoying wishful thinking. We aren't born to suffe...

Atla wrote 2nd reply - I've been thinking some more about this, but sorry I just don't see it. Meaning and value, among many other things, are necessary for us to even formulate an answer to 'why are we here'. They are necessary to even have formulations and questions and answers at all. But saying...

Atla wrote The question is why are WE here. That probably has nothing to do with value, what kind of rubbish is that? 'Value' is just a human psychological phenomenon, entirely insignificant in the grand scheme. The hard part is getting you to take serious things seriously. Put aside phenomenology,...

Atla wrote Take the person out of the confidence of knowing, go to the place where language runs out and face the world as it is? Looks like basic stuff, didn't occur to me that it's worth mentioning. One covers such issues and then returns to the non-subjective main question: why (/how) are we her...

Atla wrote And you still push it. What makes you so sure that it's time well spent? What if the other person already has an insight into the human mind that way exceeds yours? That's nowhere even near the really interesting questions of philosophy so why wouldn't it be a waste of time for me. Besid...

Atla wrote Nah, you're simply just a wishful thinker with no backbone. Instead of dealing with your own issues you try to push them on others. No wonder you avoid psychology and science, maybe you should try reading some. Or alternatively we can just accept what some people say, that phenomenology ...

Or maybe you lack the third element: a huge amount of experience with unusual states of mind. That's why you don't see that you built a castle out of psychological illusions, one of them is the inherent God-experience of humans. The certainty with which you preach your beliefs... Sorry Atla. I do s...

bahman wrote So you believe in the definition of emergence which I provided? Needless to say that I don't think that emergence is real. I have an argument for that: Think of a system with parts in which each part has a set of properties and the system has a set of properties which parts don't have ...

Dontaskme wrote I can only understand God as the unnamed one. Not as the named one - the one that is known to be named cannot be God, for only God knows. So in this sense God is an empty concept, he is the immaculate conception. The named one is the fictional character that pretends to be the one. ...