• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

The random philosophy thought thread

Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
625
If the self is an illusion, then what are the properties of that illusion? From where and how do they arise? To know of an illusion is to experience it; who or what experiences the illusion of the self, then? It seems to me that to define a who or what, here, is to give credence to the concept of an existent, actual centralized self, thus jettisoning the idea of the illusory self, anyway.

The illusory self is a contradiction. What do you think?

This is pretty western though and goes to the idea of innate nature from the judeo/christian perspective. The self as ephemeral or intangible or impermanent is more of an eastern conception and would seem to align with quantum systems/complex dynamics more easily. Instead of viewing self as an intrinsic property of an object, perhaps it is a process that arises out of dynamics between interacting objects.

Process philosophy - Wikipedia
 

nor

New member
Joined
Sep 30, 2017
Messages
24
MBTI Type
INTP
This is pretty western though and goes to the idea of innate nature from the judeo/christian perspective.

It actually seems to me the more materialist approach.

The self as ephemeral or intangible or impermanent

I don't think I see what a "permanent" self, which you seem to allude to, would look like, or how it would function; I neither proposed the idea of a "permanent" nor necessarily long-lasting self. Though, when talking about intangibility, what I wonder is how exactly this "intangibility" would lend itself to the interaction between different cognitive mechanisms and whatnot. You won't find a tangible "self" in the brain by prodding it with surgical tools, but it does seem apparent that the self arises due to the distinct structure of the brain, and the mechanisms of perception, as they feedback with cognitive processes of signification, that experience is contingent upon.

quantum systems/complex dynamics

What "quantum systems/complex systems" are you referring to, exactly? The name-dropping of quantum mechanics and appeals to complexity often come without an explanation that substantiates them to the degree necessary for the discussion at hand.

Instead of viewing self as an intrinsic property of an object, perhaps it is a process that arises out of dynamics between interacting objects.

Intrinsic, how, do you think? What I'm describing is more similar to the idea of consciousness as an emergent property of the physical processes and structures that define the physicality of a particular object; the structure and cognition of the brain, as sustained, of course, by the interacting systems that govern our bodies. But it's interesting to me how you refer to the self as a "process" -- in what respect do you think it may resemble a process? And what would an intangible/non-physical process look like, I wonder. The problem I have with your contention is that I don't immediately see how a non-physical "thing", if we may describe it as that, could arise from and interact with physical systems. But perhaps you meant something different by "intangible" and "self" -- yes?
 

Gunboat Diplomat

New member
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
338
MBTI Type
INTJ
I would offer two critiques of this position. The first being that the factors you mention can be correlated with without being causative of "will" and the second that we could theoretically be influenced by some "prime mover" via a hidden variable theory that obfuscates that agent's intent. Sometimes I wonder if a sort of panentheism/pansychism in which the universe which is us manifest as that self-reflective interstice of being is that "prime mover." A quantum bayesianist sort of "internal" view of the world

First, clarification: I don't consider the three factors necessarily exhaustive. They just seemed to be the most obvious when I listed them.

Your first point: I am not sure I understand it correctly. If you mean that they are not necessarily the direct causes of choices made, than I agree. But as the saying goes, there is no correlation without causation (yes, it could be a coincidence, but I don't think it is a serious possibility in this case*), so at the minimum some other factor causes both our choices and biology/environment/experience. Now:

A) To account for free will that other factor would have to "reside" in our consciousness AND be an uncaused prime mover (so basically solipsism or godhood)
B) This is a pretty contrived scenario - a decision making process that takes the three factors (and possibly some other ones or randomness) as inputs seems to be more sensible

Maybe you have meant something completely different though.


Your second point: Yes, it's quite possible, but again, it doesn't account for free will - see A) above.

Your pantheism angle - I have actually thought of something like that while responding to [MENTION=17729]Typh0n[/MENTION]. It is an elegant solution. But our individual, conscious manifestation of the universe would be localised and limited, so it would be a stretch to call decisions made by the universe my own - we tend to identify with our limited consciousness and generally talk about free will in this context.


* And I am aware that causality itself may be an illusion, but I won't go down that rabbit hole, especially since free will without causality would seem to make even less sense than free will by itself.
 

Gunboat Diplomat

New member
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
338
MBTI Type
INTJ
[MENTION=33169]Gunboat Diplomat[/MENTION]

I don't think that the hypothetical disemobied entity you descrie would be able to make any decisions, nor would they have consciousness since all consciousness is consciousness of something. There is no consciousness in a vacuum. A consciousness in the situation you describe would be snuffed out and cease to exist.

Agree completely.


I think I understand what you're asking here, how do I argue for the existence of free will rather than simply against biological determinism? But what are you asking, the philosophical standpoint or the psychological one? You're asking "how" it works which makes me think you're asking for a psychological explanation, but I can't be sure of it.

Both philosophical and psychological, though more psychological.


Tbh honest though, while I could research this further and it does interest me to do so, I'm afraid I don't have the time to get very deep into this discussion. I am busy with my bachelor's (not in philosphy/psychology), my internship, and looking for work. Since what you're asking would require research, probably enitre books written on it to justify one pov or another, I have to digress.

I was simply responding to Anax/asynartetic by trying to show there are other ways of looking at free will from the standpoint of biology. Unfortunetely, I don't have time to do this in depth. It's not personal, I just don't have much time to "forum" as much as I'd like. :) Perhaps I'll get back to this topic later, but I don't see exactly when that will be possible in the near future. :)

Sure. :bye: I was just curious what you meant by free will, because I haven't heard any explanation that would make a lot of sense to me - other than the compatibilist version, but that's a bit of cheating.
 

StrawberryBoots

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
Messages
407
The heavenly Father sees you're trying to stay afloat, and he sees you're trying to provide. He's not offended by the negative things you said about him. His heart is tender. He wants to help you and bless you. Let him.
 

Forever

Permabanned
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
8,551
MBTI Type
NiFi
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I found change is such a dialectical concept.

Woah.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
The heavenly Father sees you're trying to stay afloat, and he sees you're trying to provide. He's not offended by the negative things you said about him. His heart is tender. He wants to help you and bless you. Let him.

Just as I have an Earthly father, I have a Heavenly Father.

My Earthly father, had strengths and weaknesses, and I loved him.

Unfortunately our Heavenly Father covers a multitude of sins, because He is imaginary and completely unaccountable. So he can be used to justify anything from child sexual abuse to genocide. But worse, we can believe in our Heavenly Father only as long as we are entranced, where our reason is asleep, and where, as Goya showed us: the sleep of reason brings forth monsters.
 

StrawberryBoots

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
Messages
407
Just as I have an Earthly father, I have a Heavenly Father.

My Earthly father, had strengths and weaknesses, and I loved him.

Unfortunately our Heavenly Father covers a multitude of sins, because He is imaginary and completely unaccountable. So he can be used to justify anything from child sexual abuse to genocide. But worse, we can believe in our Heavenly Father only as long as we are entranced, where our reason is asleep, and where, as Goya showed us: the sleep of reason brings forth monsters.

Delivered from the wrath to come, the redeemed find peace in the Spirit of God that dwells within them, and LOVE compels them to devote themselves to the service of their Redeemer. Instead of being profane, contentious, selfish, or sensual, you'll behold, the redeemed are patient, humble, kind, and peaceable. The latter are the fruit of the Spirit from the Father of Life. The former are the follies of the father of lies: satan.
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Messages
869
Delivered from the wrath to come, the redeemed find peace in the Spirit of God that dwells within them, and LOVE compels them to devote themselves to the service of their Redeemer. Instead of being profane, contentious, selfish, or sensual, you'll behold, the redeemed are patient, humble, kind, and peaceable. The latter are the fruit of the Spirit from the Father of Life. The former are the follies of the father of lies: satan.

Hook, line, and...
pDxB0F4.jpg


sinker:
cKzbQdf.jpg
 

StrawberryBoots

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
Messages
407
Hook, line, and...
pDxB0F4.jpg


sinker:
cKzbQdf.jpg


Dear Isk Stark, My Brother,

Mole's alright.

I was responding to his comment about people who use God to justify child sexual abuse, but not limited to that example. The wicked sometimes disguise themselves as policeman, teachers, caregivers, doctors, charity workers and more.

(Sharing my perspective according to my faith and experience.)

Peace, Love, Joy :)
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Messages
869
Dear Isk Stark, My Brother,

Mole's alright.

I was responding to his comment about people who use God to justify child sexual abuse, but not limited to that example. The wicked sometimes disguise themselves as policeman, teachers, caregivers, doctors, charity workers and more.

(Sharing my perspective according to my faith and experience.)

Peace, Love, Joy :)

My Sister,

You've shown me that Christ is in our midst.

Thank you and peace be with you :bye:
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Messages
869
Before the world was made,
The Mind, Word and Breath were One,
Sharing in the One Essence, above all essences.
The Oneness of these Persons is a mystery
Whose vastness cannot be comprehended by even the highest
spirits.
Nevertheless, we attempt to give a name to this mystery of
oneness:
The name of love.
A name so great that, finding it impossible to give it due
reverence,
People dispair and treat it as commonplace.

The Mind, Word and Breath had this perfect love between
them.
Not only did They have this love,
They are this love.
Therefore, love existed before the world was made.

The love of the Maker of things cannot merely be extended
outwardly, to the universe made by Him.
In the Three this love is directed inwardly also, within the Primal
Essence:
In the mystical inward life, hidden in the depths of the
Divinity.
 

Polaris

AKA Nunki
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
2,530
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Just as the average dog doesn't recognize himself in the mirror, the average human being doesn't recognize himself in the universe.
 

StrawberryBoots

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
Messages
407
Before the world was made,
The Mind, Word and Breath were One,
Sharing in the One Essence, above all essences.
The Oneness of these Persons is a mystery
Whose vastness cannot be comprehended by even the highest
spirits.
Nevertheless, we attempt to give a name to this mystery of
oneness:
The name of love.
A name so great that, finding it impossible to give it due
reverence,
People dispair and treat it as commonplace.

The Mind, Word and Breath had this perfect love between
them.
Not only did They have this love,
They are this love.
Therefore, love existed before the world was made.

The love of the Maker of things cannot merely be extended
outwardly, to the universe made by Him.
In the Three this love is directed inwardly also, within the Primal
Essence:
In the mystical inward life, hidden in the depths of the
Divinity.
He is Jesus...
He is Elohim: God, Judge, Creator
He is Yahweh: Lord Jehovah
He is El Elyon: the Most High God
He is Adonai: Lord, Master
He is El Shaddai: Lord God Almighty
He is El Olam: the everlasting God, the god of eternity, the god of the Universe, the god of ancient days
He is…

 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I was sent forth from the power,
and I have come to those who reflect upon me,
and I have been found among those who seek after me.
Look upon me, you who reflect upon me,
and you hearers, hear me.
You who are waiting for me, take me to yourselves.
And do not banish me from your sight.
And do not make your voice hate me, nor your hearing.
Do not be ignorant of me anywhere or any time. Be on your guard!
Do not be ignorant of me.
 

Forever

Permabanned
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
8,551
MBTI Type
NiFi
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Do you guys consider to mesh religion with philosophy and call it the same?

bjMASId.jpg


vdQXs4M.gif
 

Forever

Permabanned
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
8,551
MBTI Type
NiFi
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Religion as a form of philosophy, yes.
Religious philosophy - Wikipedia

Science, even.
Philosophy of science - Wikipedia

What is philosophy?
Philosophy - Wikipedia

You are free to believe in that and yes I've studied some philosophy of religion and philosophy of science.

While semantically those words may imply something which implored me to ask. I instantly grasp what you meant.

A good way of how I see philosophy is where

Religion is on this side.
Philosophy is in the middle​
Science is on the right.​

Religion =/= Science It can of course take stuff from science and try to harmonize it, but the two approaches are not the same.

Religion explains so much the why with an authority. Science explains so much of the how with an authority.

Philosophy is the middle ground. It is the study of what neither religion nor science can explain.

Now of course this is only a way of thinking. Science is ultimately a systemized form of philosophy. And religion is a form of philosophy on some sort of external authority that has the knowledge.
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Messages
869
You are free to believe in that and yes I've studied some philosophy of religion and philosophy of science.

While semantically those words may imply something which implored me to ask. I instantly grasp what you meant.

A good way of how I see philosophy is where

Religion is on this side.
Philosophy is in the middle​
Science is on the right.​

Religion =/= Science It can of course take stuff from science and try to harmonize it, but the two approaches are not the same.

Religion explains so much the why with an authority. Science explains so much of the how with an authority.

Philosophy is the middle ground. It is the study of what neither religion nor science can explain.

Now of course this is only a way of thinking. Science is ultimately a systemized form of philosophy. And religion is a form of philosophy on some sort of external authority that has the knowledge.

I agree. Words are important, so organizing it this way may help:

Philosophy

Metaphysics here​
Epistemology here​
Physics here​

:wink:
 
Top