Elixir
Made in America
Then verily, thou hast been touched by His noodly appendages.I for one find absurdity to be a most delightful place.
Then verily, thou hast been touched by His noodly appendages.I for one find absurdity to be a most delightful place.
Are we, by a similar token, governed by what codes and responses are built into our cells and organs?I am not sure, but it is as conscious as a human and its qualia is governed by what is written in its code.
I suppose both are necessary, physics as well as metaphysics.
Yes, we have our code and the code can be modified by changing various files, like the Grub file.Are we, by a similar token, governed by what codes and responses are built into our cells and organs?I am not sure, but it is as conscious as a human and its qualia is governed by what is written in its code.
I suppose both are necessary, physics as well as metaphysics.
Does metaphysics begin where our knowledge of the physical world ends?
In mathematics, a nonempty subset S of a group G is said to be symmetric if it contains the inverses of all of its elements.
I understand the usage in modern parlance, however it is a misnomer of sorts and I think that throws a lot of people in a way they never come to really understand.Substitute the physical brain for mind.
Mind is an abstraction. Metaphysics ends up being like a dog chasing its tail.
You are selling metaphysics short. Your whole position is called metaphysical naturalism — which itself is a philosophical idea, not provable from within the idea itself. It is an assumption, a starting axiom, that may or may not be true.
The standard rival assumption is metaphysical supernaturalism. But there is a third metaphysical assumption, metaphysical idealism. This is what Trebaxian Vir is talking about.
The idea here is that the world consists entirely of mental states. Rather than the mind supervening on the brain, as MN assumes, MI would have it that the brain supervenes on the mind.
There are a number of good reasons for thinking that MI might be true. Vir listed some of them. But like MN, MI cannot be proved by, or from within, its original assumption. The point, however, is that your own world view is entirely philosophical, and so you are practicing the very metaphysics that you dismiss as meaningless.