Philosophical Speculations

The thing is that as long as Cleric continues to engage in the discussions within discussions, this being his choice as the Topic starter, in which case he might as well have posted it in the GD section, then I might as well treat it as if it is in GD. Anyway, the last time with the Gebser tangent ...

The world-stuff exists in my experience. Prove it doesn't. You need to realize that this is just another unprovable assumption, if you really want to be consistent in your commitment not to take any assumptions. In your (or my) experience only sense perceptions exist that feel/look like the "w...

Too many assumptions. I'll just stick with my experience. That's all I know. That's great. This is Zen. But note that you would also need to drop the assumption of the existence of any non-conscious "world stuff" existing beyond your experience, because all you know and can ever know is o...

Yes. The problem with experience is that my experience is different from your experience. There is now no objective truth just each self-experience imagining self-truths. The argument for experience as primary leads to the end of philosophy. Perhaps this is for the better. I can have a world where ...

You assume that knowing consciousness can exist only above the surface and imagine through rocks, dust and reflections the true archipelago of which the island is part. What the Central Topic speaks about is that what is below the surface (behind the eye of thinking) can also be known consciously ....

Yea right. "My intuition is true intuition, your intuition is false intuition". The end of philosophy.

So, the view of the evolutionary path that you are presenting is correct if taken together with a variety of other dimensions and paths of the development, but it would be incomplete and too reductionist/limited if it is claimed that all development is only reduced/limited to such path. Let me try ...

This is something which I haven't seen mentioned so far in these hammer back and forths. An important distinction that we should make is that in the imagined hammer we're working entirely in the domain of Thought. When we lift the hammer with our arm we also activate our Will. The reader may take f...

You seem to be suggesting that we can't derive mind from matter but it is entirely possible to derive matter from mind. I'd love to know how. In idealism there is no matter whatsoever, so there is no need to "derive matter from mind", there is only "appearance of matter" in our ...

Seen in this way, the quest for perfection is not to stagnate in perfect symmetry. It's the creative endeavor to find those rhythms, those patterns which are compatible with and promote life and consciousness. I hope I was able to convey this idea sufficiently. Please stop for a moment and think ab...