Philosophical Speculations

I don't detect any logical progression of thought in these fragments - I see ambiguous flowery language generated in nearly random order. Word Salad trick -> occaisionally a word is capitalized impying the word has some special meaning other than what a normal person might think..

Even if you substitute Hoffman's network of conscious agents for W it is still "out there". Goethe thought light was "out there" too. I think a more accurate phrase than "out there", is "independent of individual mind(s)" BK, Rupert Spira and physicalists all...

to prove Materialism/Physicalism we'd have to find 'matter', we'd have to discover (be aware of) something outside of what we are aware of.

This question just keeps nagging at me. Both ancient Hinduism and Buddhism are very committed to the idea that people's mission in this reality is to check out of it. To awaken to its illusory nature, not just for the purpose of being able to experience it in a more level-headed way, not just for r...

Bernardo never begins as a Materialist, he begins by presenting the Materialist arguemnt and then defeating the materialist argument by suggesting that there is nothing about matter (what we know of matter) that would predict matter generating experience, or matter becoming aware of itself. While Be...

In my humble opinion the best and simplist approach is to be opposed to any possibility of life after death, and take advantage of the opportunity you have right now. Clarity of mind, clarity in seeing, touching, tasting, hearing and smelling . . . this will get you places in either Materialist or I...

not sure what these 3 words add to each other "Existential reality exists"
and then I don't agree with "Existentially as a life atom/SOUL the structure of every individual is complete and no longer able to change." or maybe I don't understand it

Regarding the 'Baloney' argument (see previous post), I don't think it is simpler to assume the existence of other minds than it is to assume my mind can create appearances of behaviors which suggest the existence of other minds, so I don't think this argument successfully refutes solipsism. Solips...

I don't believe in solipsism, nor that thinking is only trivial or illusory. Solipsism was mentioned just to remark that objecting to the reality of un-consciousness by appealing to personal experience is problematic, as this also excludes the reality of other minds too. So either you stay to your ...

Re solipsism, I'm not aware of any arguments to defeat solipsism, but that does make it a good philosophy. In fact it's a dead-end useless POV, and all ontologies, including materialism/physicalism and idealism, require inferences that include a world outside of the finite mind.