Philosophical Speculations

Am I deluded, or are you doing there Deleuze rather masterfully? Reading so well that you internalize the method and can apply it creatively is what I call loyalty to the text . :) Honestly, one of the reasons Deleuze appeals to me so much is that he expresses that thing my mind does . The rhizomat...

As a followup, from a perspective where there is a singular, unified M@L, Freya Mathews writes in For Love of Matter pretty extensively on the poetic way in which the world-consciousness communicates with individualized consciousnesses -- synchronicity is a part of her whole theory of eros.

What if God was not an idea in distance, what if God was each of us, to each other? What if God only imagines it is God by way of one its metacognitive expressions, which upon the realization of this breaks out in Divine laughter? Outside of her dreams, God knows nothing because there's nothing to ...

My sense is that it's basically as you say -- our environment and we ourselves are steeped in an interconnected web of meaning, so unexpected points of contact within that web follow pretty naturally. RQM would not deny the web of meaning, only its grounding in a preexisting, singular, unified Mind.

The difference seems to be precisely that -- while Kastrup maintains a relational existence for everything that is grounded by M@L, Rovelli removes M@L itself and only has the relationships left. His metaphysics might be closer to Whitehead, Deleuze, or some variations of Buddhist metaphysics (he h...

That bolded part is not an explanation, though. It is frequently mistaken for an explanation, but it's not. This happens a lot in materialist Darwinian theory, for ex. - we will ask about a certain trait of our psychic life and the materialist Darwinian will say that is explained by the fact that &...

SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Sun Jul 04, 2021 7:58 am What if God was not an idea in distance, what if God was each of us, to each other?

Well, that's about the most succinctly I've ever seen my theology put. ^_^

I confess that I am not reaching the state of "intuitive" with this theme. Thanks for the answers, maybe there is an explanation so simple that it makes me feel ashamed of not having understood, but I'm just not getting there.. Alan Watts is a good way into intuiting nondualism. I recomme...

The difference seems to be precisely that -- while Kastrup maintains a relational existence for everything that is grounded by M@L, Rovelli removes M@L itself and only has the relationships left. His metaphysics might be closer to Whitehead, Deleuze, or some variations of Buddhist metaphysics (he hi...

(I'm not suggesting that you would agree with every word, but I think you'd find a lot to agree with.)