Philosophical Speculations

It's sloppy to rely on this assumption when further analysis of the process might lead to either finding live brain cells that aren't dissolved by chrysalis enzymes I'm not a biologist but I'm amazed that at the current stage of bioscience development it is still unknown whether the brain cells sur...

We don't perceive (experience) the world or ourselves without also thinking about them at the same time. Percept without concept is a "blooming buzzing confusion", or at least that's what it is fancied to be. Claiming agnosticism towards belief is itself a belief. That's right, it's just ...

I'm really trying to figure out what this obsession with panpsychist ontology is for people who are clearly fed up with materialism and are also familiar with idealism. I think panpsychism is the ontology of choice for people like Goff who are smart and honest enough to admit that pure materialisti...

Lou Gold wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 7:55 pm My faith is experience-based, not belief-based. I'm agnostic toward belief.

mine too!

Yet the beauty of the Great Mysteriousness is that it constantly rediscover itself in new degrees of freedom, which throw light on the former states. ... When we assume a given intellectual position, we lose the sight of others. This can be illustrated with the famous cube illusion. Once we see it ...

I must also confess that the point about 'realism' is lost on me. BK's idealism clearly states that there is a reality that must still exist independent of any given alter-mode consciousness, but not, as is the premise of physicalism, independent of the fundamental, irreducible Consciousness that i...

The idea of there being the possibility of understanding truth through consensus is exactly what Peirce proposed as the way the truth is obtained--through the consensus that arises among a community of inquirers who are all using the 'semiotic spiral' which we call the 'scientific method' to make s...

If blind spiritual activity was the only thing at play, we would have consciousness only from moment to moment - doing this, doing that. But if we observe correctly we see that we don't experience activity only in some infinitesimal moment of Now but activity, so to speak, implodes, integrates, gro...

The "I" is the thing that sees but is never seen. If it is never seen how it is possible to prove that it exists? But: We don't know what we are but we most certainly feel as the causative spiritual activity, responsible for the words of our voice, that we hear in our head. This causative...

Ok, that is an important aspect that may be a weakness in my presentation. Where is the "I" that has the experience ? Is it a part of the experience turned "inwards" and therefore inexperienceable (is that a word?). I am aware of it and I really have a hard time figuring that on...