Josh, some friendly banjo atheist suggestions. I would like to know who Robin is. Also, your website goes by way too fast and is so small I can't make it out. I would like to go there right now but need to go to Google to find you. Mighty fine discussion. Thank you for posting this. Here's to many more from you.
3:34 _"If you were an idealist and you thought there was a great mind behind everything"_ Why does he go from idealism to _"a great mind"_ ? Idealism needs nothing more than one's own mind...
Though I love these interviews, I find I get distracted by how uncomfortable the participants must be in having to constantly turn their body and head at the other person. After 54 minutes weren't Josh's and Robin's necks aching? [grin] Maybe the chairs could be set slightly (or greatly) facing each other, that way both the participants and the viewers are more comfortable. Also, what's with the changes in sound quality and volume? That should be fixed eventually.
Why would idealism ‘not sit well’ with creation? God’s thinking is creation. Logical and sound. Energy = God’s thinking and it’s beautifull and consistent, hence finetuning and laws. Hence possibility for miracles also. Idealism is the most credible metaphysical position, I think.
The Dutch Philosopher Bart Streumer recently published a book on normativity (Unbelievable Errors: An Error Theory about All Normative Judgments). He says that all forms of normativity are false, including logical normativity. So, he believes that he cannot believe the conclusion he is proposing in his book, but does think it's true if we do not accept the conclusion.
Very interesting. I think what we call the mind is somehow connected to our brain, because we barely know how the brain works. We have dendrites and nuerons that transmit signals almost like electricity, and we barely have the faintest clue how it works. We know that certain parts of the brain correspond to certain aspects of the mind, and that if you damage a specific area of the brain that it will make you lose the functioning of that part of your mind. But the brain, the mind, and consciousness are somehow all connected. If you shoot yourself in the head, or you get knocked on the head hard enough, you will go unconscious. Your mind will stop. It is like someone hits the off switch on the electricity. If you get punched and get knocked out, your no longer conscious, you are no longer aware of reality and what surrounds you. It is like your mind gets shut off. So the brain has to be connected to what we call the mind in some way that we just cant understand how it all works.
It's quite simple map all these biological effects TO spacetime. NOW we are discussing non-absolute biological mechanism. That is, type identity theory FROM 0D frequency space (parametrics), ... perceived as spacetime volumes from classical wave information. We should not describe the brain as a wet, vibrating, biological organ. It is a system in spacetime, not maintained by its own constituents but rather the information that it 'owns' in an economy of fields. Yes - we do derive consciousness from the brain. Yes - the mind IS located IN the brain. NO - the brain is not located in objective spacetime geometry. NO - the brain is not absolutely causal. IN fact if you account for the terrestrial muon providing evidence of both time dilation and length contraction being ontological, we must port the senses (emperical, measurement) TO the meta-phenomenal.
Josh is the real deal. We need more real scholars talking about tough philosophical issues on TH-cam. Thanks for this.
Josh, some friendly banjo atheist suggestions. I would like to know who Robin is. Also, your website goes by way too fast and is so small I can't make it out. I would like to go there right now but need to go to Google to find you. Mighty fine discussion. Thank you for posting this. Here's to many more from you.
I wonder how such brilliant discussions get so few views
Indeed. A ton of knowledge is being shared in this video. It’s a real gem.
Well look where the culture is. Focused only on pleasure, this doesn't give immediate pleasure like Sitcoms, reality TV, sex, drugs and so on, does
This combo is brilliant! Very insightful, thank you!
What denotes a causal relationship within the context of idealism?
What about neutral monism ?
Please provide a link to the "I believe *star*" article/paper. Thank you.
3:34 _"If you were an idealist and you thought there was a great mind behind everything"_
Why does he go from idealism to _"a great mind"_ ?
Idealism needs nothing more than one's own mind...
Though I love these interviews, I find I get distracted by how uncomfortable the participants must be in having to constantly turn their body and head at the other person. After 54 minutes weren't Josh's and Robin's necks aching? [grin]
Maybe the chairs could be set slightly (or greatly) facing each other, that way both the participants and the viewers are more comfortable.
Also, what's with the changes in sound quality and volume? That should be fixed eventually.
Why would idealism ‘not sit well’ with creation? God’s thinking is creation. Logical and sound. Energy = God’s thinking and it’s beautifull and consistent, hence finetuning and laws. Hence possibility for miracles also. Idealism is the most credible metaphysical position, I think.
Pro-tip. I've found that simply identifying as OSR-1 (ontic structural realism #1, Ladyman) is equivalent with idealism and receives less push-back.
I completely agree with you.
The Dutch Philosopher Bart Streumer recently published a book on normativity (Unbelievable Errors: An Error Theory about All Normative Judgments). He says that all forms of normativity are false, including logical normativity. So, he believes that he cannot believe the conclusion he is proposing in his book, but does think it's true if we do not accept the conclusion.
Very interesting. I think what we call the mind is somehow connected to our brain, because we barely know how the brain works. We have dendrites and nuerons that transmit signals almost like electricity, and we barely have the faintest clue how it works. We know that certain parts of the brain correspond to certain aspects of the mind, and that if you damage a specific area of the brain that it will make you lose the functioning of that part of your mind. But the brain, the mind, and consciousness are somehow all connected. If you shoot yourself in the head, or you get knocked on the head hard enough, you will go unconscious. Your mind will stop. It is like someone hits the off switch on the electricity. If you get punched and get knocked out, your no longer conscious, you are no longer aware of reality and what surrounds you. It is like your mind gets shut off. So the brain has to be connected to what we call the mind in some way that we just cant understand how it all works.
It's quite simple map all these biological effects TO spacetime. NOW we are discussing non-absolute biological mechanism.
That is, type identity theory FROM 0D frequency space (parametrics), ... perceived as spacetime volumes from classical wave information.
We should not describe the brain as a wet, vibrating, biological organ.
It is a system in spacetime, not maintained by its own constituents but rather the information that it 'owns' in an economy of fields.
Yes - we do derive consciousness from the brain.
Yes - the mind IS located IN the brain.
NO - the brain is not located in objective spacetime geometry.
NO - the brain is not absolutely causal.
IN fact if you account for the terrestrial muon providing evidence of both time dilation and length contraction being ontological, we must port the senses (emperical, measurement) TO the meta-phenomenal.
My tv screen has aboutness.
Your TV screen receives through connections with wires and satellite waves. So nothing similar to intententionality.
lol mind spooky