Recent content by max1975

Unfortunately, I believe you are correct. I assure you I'm trying to be as logical as possible, but I do maintain that the subject matter does not lend itself to logic. I'll do my best to clarify; if I fail, I'll shut up--no sense confusing you further. This is pretty straightforward...

Hi Rade. In general, I think, non-thinking is the stated goal of meditation. If you equate "consciousness" with "thinking" (as seems to happen often around here) you're likely to misunderstand the meditators. But the thing is very difficult to speak about clearly. I think in this case...

Thanks for the replies to my rant. While the answers are not wholly satisfying, I think you've shown me honestly and reasonably why they can't be, due to the legitimate boundaries of science. I do think it is entirely appropriate for Science (by which I mean the public image, not the...

A couple cents... I am tempted to make a vigorous theological case against Intelligent Design, and an even more vigorous theological case against old-school creationism. But either would likely run afoul of the forum's religion rules. So I'm afraid science (or rather a set of people claiming...

Maybe if you were to start answering those, I would begin to see the utility of your radical concept. Let's not be harsh. To the extent that it sounds like gibberish, it does so because it is a philosophy that addresses the foundations of reason, and thus exists at the limits of reason, and...

It's been a long ime since I read Descartes. Did he note the similarity between his statement and God's? Or did he not write that down because it sounds kinda blasphemous?

I'm not about to argue that Descartes' formulation is superior to God's; just that it is logical (if not terribly informative), and that if you flip it around to "I am, thus, I think" as Rade suggested, it is (apparently) false, because there are many things that exist (apparently) without thinking.

Descartes has many problems, but I think he's on stable ground here. That he thinks proves that he is (because, like you say, there must be something doing the thinking), but that he is does not prove that he thinks. Plenty of things exist and (to all appearances) don't think.

The why didn't you say so, or keep silent, instead of attributing to me the nonsensical claim that a whimsical desire by itself achieves knowledge? This is an assertion; I am not convinced. I see contradictory relationships all the time. I believe there is a non-contradictory solution to...

Not achieved, no, but if you do not desire knowledge you will not look for it, and if you don't look for it you won't find it. Not at all. It does negate the claim that things are necessarily rational, but that is not the same thing. All A is A is really not getting me anywhere. It...

Here's my suggestion, for whatever it's worth: First comes the admission that some aspects of reality are non-rational, akin to the idea of a singularity where the laws of physics no longer function. Second is the desire to know about these aspects of reality anyway. Third is the...

The realization of profundity appears to be eluding me left and right. It's late; I'll grapple with your philosophy again tomorrow.

Okay, this is where we disagree. I don't believe I've made any error (except perhaps in my explanation, this stuff is always tricky.) The "I" of me is not an electro-chemical wavefunction bounded within biological cells called neurons. That wavefunction is just a temporarily associated object...

I'm not so sure about that. If I'm going to pretend I'm an object, what I see in the mirror is a remarkably unsuitable candidate for the object I'm pretending to be. Since it is the object I have (relatively) most control over, it is practical to identify with it for purposes of dealing with...

I guess I see what you're saying here. But it seems to me the meaning is redundant. There's something bothering me about this statement, but I'll leave it for now. Hmm. That sounds almost . . . mystical. Honestly, yes. "A is A" tells me nothing I don't already know. It bores me...