Something Instead of Nothing

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby surreptitious75 » Fri Dec 21, 2018 1:20 pm

iambiguous wrote:
How do we determine in an autonomous universe for life forms such as ours what is in fact [ rationally virtuously ] the right thing to do

Whether the Universe is for life forms or not is entirely irrelevant as it just is regardless of whatever intelligence it might actually contain
Rationally and virtuously are at all the same because while the former can be explained by logic the latter can only explained by emotion
The fact of the matter is that there is no objective way for demonstrating the right thing to do for it can only be subjectively determined
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1163
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Fri Dec 21, 2018 8:19 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
how is it demonstrated definitively that what we agree or disagree with reflects some level of autonomy

The very fact that we can disagree and have different points of view is evidence of individual autonomy
Absolute autonomy however is not an option as the free will we do have comes with specific limitations


I agree that viscerally, intuitively it certainly seems that way. But in dreams I am in turn absolutely convinced that "in the moment" I -- "I" -- am freely choosing what I do.

Unless of course "me" in my dreams is very different from "you" in your dreams from "others" in their dreams.

I presume this frame of mind may or may not be related to what some call "psychological freedom". This psychological freedom then being [for some] "compatible" with a metaphysically determined world. The fact is that we do choose some things rather than others. Even if we were never able to choose other than as we did.

I have simply never been able to grasp this sort of "compatibility".

Those hypothetical aliens up in their actual autonomous segment of the universe look down upon earthlings in their wholly determined segment and note that we think and feel that we are choosing autonomously...but we're not.

And I agree that given some measure of autonomy it can never be absolute. We can't just do what we will ourselves to do. The individual will is embodied out in a particular world understood in a particular way. Here there is the either/or world in which objective truths seem able to be established for all of us, and the is/ought world where [from my frame of mind] "I" is considerably more an existential contraption.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Fri Dec 21, 2018 8:45 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
How do we determine in an autonomous universe for life forms such as ours what is in fact [ rationally virtuously ] the right thing to do

Whether the Universe is for life forms or not is entirely irrelevant as it just is regardless of whatever intelligence it might actually contain


Sure, with regard to anything that we think and feel we can always fall back on "it just is". As though that in and of itself explains why it is this something and not another. And how that in turn definitively encompasses why there is something instead of nothing at all.

But at least psychologically merely believing that "it just is" is enough to offer a particular "I" some measure of comfort and consolation.

surreptitious75 wrote: Rationally and virtuously are at all the same because while the former can be explained by logic the latter can only explained by emotion


Unless of course you are an objectivist of the Ayn Rand school. A capital letter Objectivist.

And I challenge anyone here using only logic to explain why there can only be something instead of nothing. And why it can only be this something and not another.

Logic it would seem is only applicable to that matter able to evolve into minds able to invent philosophy able to grapple with "rules of language" used in communicating what is said to be rational or irrational thinking.

surreptitious75 wrote: The fact of the matter is that there is no objective way for demonstrating the right thing to do for it can only be subjectively determined


But even here how would you go about demonstrating that beyond all doubt? How can we know for certain that moral and political narratives are not in fact just existential contraptions rooted out in particular worlds historically, culturally and experientially?

Here and now I certainly think this is a reasonable assumption. But then the gap between what I think I know about it and all that can be known about it going all the way back to an ontological understanding of existence itself doesn't go away.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby surreptitious75 » Sat Dec 22, 2018 2:00 am

iambiguous wrote:
And I challenge anyone here using only logic to explain why there can only be something instead of nothing . And why it can only be this something and not another

I cannot give a logical reason only a scientific one : absolute nothing cannot persist because it will be be violated by quantum fluctuations
And this is why there always has to be something rather than nothing though the type of something would be random rather than specific
There is no reason for example why we have to exist : we just do. But the Universe itself would still have to exist in one form or another
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1163
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby Meno_ » Sat Dec 22, 2018 2:14 am

And, .....the universe could not' exist' without our existence.
Last edited by Meno_ on Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby surreptitious75 » Sat Dec 22, 2018 2:45 am

iambiguous wrote:
How can we know for certain that moral and political narratives are not in fact just existential contraptions rooted out in
particular worlds historically culturally and experientially ?

Here and now I certainly think this is a reasonable assumption. But then the gap between what I think I know about it and
all that can be known about it going all the way back to an ontological understanding of existence itself doesnt go away

A species with a highly developed pre frontal cortex such as us will inevitably discover sophisticated means for how to live both individually and collectively
This is where morality [ individually ] and politics / philosophy / religion [ collectively ] come from. Ontology [ a branch of philosophy ] features in this also

As these states deal with the human condition then existentialism will feature within them and the basic driver for all this is an attempt to understand our place in the grand scheme of things and especially because of our mortality which can make it all seem entirely meaningless. So religion was invented in order to overcome
our fear of death. Whether it is actually true or not is another matter but it is for many an antidote to the otherwise aforementioned meaninglessness of existence

However an alternative view [ one I subscribe to ] is that nothing truly matters only in the here and now. Our existence is important to us even though we are only
passing through. But from the perspective of the Universe it makes precisely zero difference whether we exist or not and eventually we shall be extinct and be no
more. This all sounds very depressing but it is only so if you let it be. For me the inevitability of non existence is something I simply accept without question. Even
more so as there is nothing to be afraid of in an eternal state of death
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1163
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby Jakob » Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:46 am

The world could indeed not at all exist, nothing would exist, except that I made it so.

Its not logically understandable for you, my creations. It's just my will.

Why do I exist? Because you don't understand.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7140
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:19 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
And I challenge anyone here using only logic to explain why there can only be something instead of nothing . And why it can only be this something and not another


I cannot give a logical reason only a scientific one : absolute nothing cannot persist because it will be be violated by quantum fluctuations

And this is why there always has to be something rather than nothing though the type of something would be random rather than specific


Differentiating logical from rational/reasonable thinking here can get tricky. And now differeniating either one from scientific thinking?

I've always associated logic with the "rules of language". And that is only pertinent to matter that has evolved into minds like ours.

So it would seem that before the advent of human consciousness [or the equivalent in alien life forms] making such distinctions would literally have been unthinkable.

And yet few doubt that "something" existed long before there were minds around to question it.

So, in a mindless universe, what would it mean to suggest that "absolute nothing cannot persist because it will be be violated by quantum fluctuations".

My own bottom line here is that science came into existence [on earth] billions of years after our own particular somethingness came into existence after the Big Bang.

But, again: Whatever that might possibly mean going all the way back to an ontological explanation for existence itself.

Science would seem to be no less circumscribed -- circumvented? -- by Hume's distinction between correlation and cause and effect.

surreptitious75 wrote: There is no reason for example why we have to exist : we just do. But the Universe itself would still have to exist in one form or another


But how on earth would you go about demonstrating this either logically, rationally or scientifically?

Other then by merely insisting that this is what you happen to believe "here and now" in your head.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Sun Dec 23, 2018 4:19 am

Meno_ wrote:And, .....the universe could not' exist' without our existence.


Well, it seems reasonable to suggest that the universe did in fact exist for billions of years without our existence. But then that gets you thinking about the first conscious entities to ever have existed at all.

And then the extent to which matter conscious of itself as matter able to ponder and to probe questions like this can ever be wholly explained.

And, in particular, in a No God universe.

How exactly does one wrap their head around a universe in which there are in fact no entities around able to even broach the idea of existence itself? Let alone explain it.

A universe that truly reflects just the "brute facticity" of existing.

Period.

Nothing more to be said because nothing more can be said.

And, even with regard to those able to say something, having no way in which to really know beyond all doubt if they were ever really free to not say it.

We just keep coming back to all those things that seem impossible to explain that, in fact, may or may be explainable at all.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby Meno_ » Sun Dec 23, 2018 5:31 pm

And then the extent to which matter conscious of itself as matter able to ponder and to probe questions like this can ever be wholly explained.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby Meno_ » Sun Dec 23, 2018 5:40 pm

Meno_ wrote:And then the extent to which matter conscious of itself as matter able to ponder and to probe questions like this can ever be wholly explained.



The space time continuum takes care of periods of unconsciousness, not clearing the slate, but constantly generating other receptacles of receivers of newer and newer realities.
The temporal spans are as enormous as they are, near infinity their stretch changes their rate of change to near absolute, creating a sense of stillness, or a sense of near eternity. This sense is being challenged by artificial inventions of motion, which makes everything smaller , and unbelievably real , challenging the aesthetic necessity for man"s God nature. Men are fearful to return to a punishing God.


Iambiguous- sorry, the paraphrase belongs to You, I miscopied.



They speak of 3 kinds of singularities, those of the cosmological-astrophisical of black holes, of the coming of a cognitive-cyber singularity , and the coming of god, a god hidden within the strange metaphoric being of. a higher form of energy.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Sun Dec 23, 2018 8:57 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
How can we know for certain that moral and political narratives are not in fact just existential contraptions rooted out in
particular worlds historically culturally and experientially ?

Here and now I certainly think this is a reasonable assumption. But then the gap between what I think I know about it and
all that can be known about it going all the way back to an ontological understanding of existence itself doesnt go away

A species with a highly developed pre frontal cortex such as us will inevitably discover sophisticated means for how to live both individually and collectively


You make a claim like this and all I can do is to keep pointing out that while you believe it is true in your head, you have no capacity that I am aware to actually demonstrate why all rational human beings are obligated to believe the same.

Unless of course you can demonstrate it.

I look around me at a world that is bursting at the seams with conflicting goods. Historically, there were communities in which the community itself was the fundamental hub in the wheel. Today that is only more or less the case. Depending on where you go across the globe.

And, sure, you can always fall back on a word like "inevitable" when you need to "prove" that your argument, while not borne out today, will be borne out at some point in the future.

surreptitious75 wrote: This is where morality [ individually ] and politics / philosophy / religion [ collectively ] come from. Ontology [ a branch of philosophy ] features in this also

As these states deal with the human condition then existentialism will feature within them and the basic driver for all this is an attempt to understand our place in the grand scheme of things and especially because of our mortality which can make it all seem entirely meaningless. So religion was invented in order to overcome
our fear of death. Whether it is actually true or not is another matter but it is for many an antidote to the otherwise aforementioned meaninglessness of existence


Okay, that is a "general description" of human interactions that seems reasonable to me. It reflects one aspect of "the human condition" embedded in that particular "somethingness" of which we are a part today. But it doesn't make conflicting goods go away. And it it is but one of many such narratives proposed as a way of explaining existence as we know it today.

surreptitious75 wrote: However an alternative view [ one I subscribe to ] is that nothing truly matters only in the here and now. Our existence is important to us even though we are only
passing through. But from the perspective of the Universe it makes precisely zero difference whether we exist or not and eventually we shall be extinct and be no
more. This all sounds very depressing but it is only so if you let it be. For me the inevitability of non existence is something I simply accept without question. Even
more so as there is nothing to be afraid of in an eternal state of death


On the other hand, how close have you actually been to death? The falling over into the abyss that becomes nothingness for all of eternity death. Not death the intellectual contraption.

And the bottom line [mine] is that in a world awash in contingency, chance and change, any new experience, relationship or access to new knowledge and information, might reconfigure your own particular "I" in any number of ways.

The part about dasein -- "I" as an existential contraption -- in other words.

But the bottom line that you may well embody is that whatever you are able to convince yourself is true in your head here and now "works" if it provides you with some measure of comfort and consolation.

So, for all practicial purposes, here and now, you have "licked" death. You can deal with it in ways that others [like me] are not able to.

But two crucial things still prevail in my view:

1] neither of us are able to close the gap between what we think is true here and all that can be known about existence in order to be absolutely certain beyond all doubt
2] neither of us are able to demonstrate with absolute certainty that the words that we are exchanging here were not the only words we were ever able to exchange
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:18 pm

Jakob wrote:The world could indeed not at all exist, nothing would exist, except that I made it so.

Its not logically understandable for you, my creations. It's just my will.

Why do I exist? Because you don't understand.


First, let me ask you this...

This post was but one of a torrent of posts that you submitted yesterday. What on earth prompted that? It is usually something that the Kids here punish us with. And I certainly don't construe you to be a part of that gang.

Existence because you made it so? Solipsism? I'm but another "character" created by your "will"? I don't understand because I was never able to understand what you will?

Or, like God, do you embody your very own mysterious ways? Your posts just being too deep for the likes of folks like me.

Or, as the Tragically Hip once put it...

"Interesting and sophisticated
Refusing to be celebrated
It's a monumental big screen kiss
It's so deep it's meaningless"
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:46 pm

Meno_ wrote:
The space time continuum takes care of periods of unconsciousness, not clearing the slate, but constantly generating other receptacles of receivers of newer and newer realities.
The temporal spans are as enormous as they are, near infinity their stretch changes their rate of change to near absolute, creating a sense of stillness, or a sense of near eternity. This sense is being challenged by artificial inventions of motion, which makes everything smaller , and unbelievably real , challenging the aesthetic necessity for man"s God nature. Men are fearful to return to a punishing God.


Are you just being ironic here? Or were you actually able to convince yourself that all of this comes closest to explaining whatever it is that you are trying to explain about existence?

In any event, what interest me is the extent to which you can relate it to the life that you live from day to day.


Meno_ wrote:They speak of 3 kinds of singularities, those of the cosmological-astrophisical of black holes, of the coming of a cognitive-cyber singularity , and the coming of god, a god hidden within the strange metaphoric being of. a higher form of energy.


They being those no less embedded [problematically] in the gap between what they can in fact prove to be true and all that must be proven in order to explain existence itself.

As with a God, the God, my God is there the scientific equivalent of a singularity, the singularity, my singularity.

Mine being the only one able to explain existence.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby Meno_ » Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:03 pm

I don't know, only that the singularity of AI is forecasted to be in a decade, around 2025, wherein would the underlying relationship between the ways of experiencing affinity between the three, become more of a certainty.That's based on the yearly doubling of the amount of progressive accumulation of present and future depositions of knowledge.

And yes, god can, according to this almost prophetic idea, the definitions can be changed to include any two within the third form, but the worn out nature of positivist philosophy is not expected to survive into the next generation. This surmise s as well the collusive nature of culpability , belief and the rate of accumulated information.


The symbol of Orobourus comes to mind here.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:53 pm

iambiguous wrote:
whatever you are able to convince yourself is true in your head here and now works if it provides you with some measure of comfort and consolation

So for all practicial purposes here and now you have licked death . You can deal with it in ways that others [ like me ] are not able to

But two crucial things still prevail in my view :

neither of us are able to close the gap between what we think is true here and all that can be known about existence in order to be absolutely certain beyond all doubts

neither of us are able to demonstrate with absolute certainty that the words that we are exchanging here were not the only words we were ever able to exchange

I am not interested in seeking comfort and consolation above everything else. I prefer to reference reality into my world view because
one that denys or ignores reality is not worth having [ at least for me ] I therefore try to avoid having one that is dogmatic and so it is
not something that is set in stone. Although there are some things that are known to be absolutely certain such as death for example

But you cannot be absolutely certain of everything as future events have yet to happen although knowledge does increase over time
And this allows for any modification of ones world view and so I always try to make sure that my own is grounded in said knowledge
And while it will always only be an approximation there is no reason as to why it can not and should not be as accurate as possible
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1163
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:17 pm

Meno_ wrote:I don't know, only that the singularity of AI is forecasted to be in a decade, around 2025, wherein would the underlying relationship between the ways of experiencing affinity between the three, become more of a certainty.That's based on the yearly doubling of the amount of progressive accumulation of present and future depositions of knowledge.


Okay, just out of curiosity, if and when this event -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity -- does occur, how will our day to day lives be effected? How might one be able to take advantage of it to make their existence more productive or fulfilling or meaningful?

Will we be that much closer to a Terminator world?

Will we be grappling with the real matrix?

In any event, I imagine that we will still be stuck with connecting the dots between this particular brave new world and a full and complete understanding of existence qua existence itself.

And maybe by then we'll be closer to pinning down the role that autonomy plays in all this. If any.

And then [of course] the role played by any particular God that might exist.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby Meno_ » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:40 pm

Yes, but the distances between the holes will be more calibrated, and in would hope the matrix would become more clear and the role of what reality has to play within that matrix.


A Terminator world, may define the necessary boundaries of that matrix within the matrix reality, to protect the roles by using those to protect those boundaries from misunderstanding the changing relationships that the overall workings of a unifies system requires.

Whether these fit with all individual requirements of what happiness in a future society may entail, would justifiably go hand in hand, with practically begin to narrow those pockets of information.

There will always be room for artists to keep the gates and doors of peeception/Preception open, if and only if, they can remove themselves periodically without getting those doors slam on them.

Where the 'eye's future perception/perception leads us, is immaterial in an aesthetic world of poetic licence, laced with the GUIDE lines of a presumed beneficial intelligence.

The thought that such intelligence can become adverse to such presumptions , can be over come without resorting to an absolute binary program of development, in less then a generation.

Call me an optimist, albeit by necessity.
Last edited by Meno_ on Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:05 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Mon Dec 24, 2018 8:43 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:I am not interested in seeking comfort and consolation above everything else. I prefer to reference reality into my world view because one that denys or ignores reality is not worth having [ at least for me ] I therefore try to avoid having one that is dogmatic and so it is not something that is set in stone. Although there are some things that are known to be absolutely certain such as death for example


Well, whatever we think our motivation and intention might be in pursing an understanding of these relationships, the fact is that what we have come to conclude about them here and now either will comfort us more or less than disturb us.

But the tricky part embedded in human psychology is that we may not really be able to discern what is actually propelling "I" into the future -- a belief that comforts us more than disturbs us or a wanting to believe in something that comforts us more than disturbs us.

This part: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296

Only taking it out beyond moral and political contraptions and grappling with it regarding the biggest questions of all.

My own interest here revolves around two particular contexts:

1] how what we believe impacts our capacity to "do the right thing" on this side of the grave
2] how what we believe shapes our frame of mind regarding "I" on the other side of the grave

It's just that here it is often difficult to grasp with any precision where human philosophy ends and human psychology begins.

As for the "accuracy" of our conclusions, what you say makes sense to me. It all comes down to where the lines are drawn existentially; and the extent which what is believed to be accurate can be demonstrated to, in fact, be accurate. Given what we think we do know here and now about the world around us.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:10 pm

Meno_ wrote: Yes, but the distances between the holes will be more calibrated, and in would hope the matrix would become more clear and the role of what reality has to play within that matrix.


As always, my own interest here revolves more around the extent to which, after this event happens [if and when it does], the lives that we live from day to day are impacted. The "for all practical purposes" part.

Remember back when the Y2K hysteria was at its peak? All manner of dire predictions were made. Instead, "for all practical purposes" almost nothing.

So, what I'll be looking for with this one, are actual descriptions of the recalibrated holes. The part where flesh and blood human beings draw lines in the lives they live between reality and the matrix.

Meno_ wrote: A Terminator world, may define the necessary boundaries of that matrix within the matrix reality, to protect the roles by using those to protect those boundaries from misunderstanding the changing relationships that the overall workings of a unifies system requires.


Same here. The life you lived before and after the machines take over. In other words, the part where what and who and why you think you are stops and the "system" begins.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Thu Dec 27, 2018 8:28 pm

More speculation:

Rose Dale, Floreat, Western Australia in Philosophy Now magazine.

"There is something because there is literally no such thing as nothing at all, and there possibly never was. Spinoza and Einstein, among many other great thinkers."


To me, this seems applicable only until we take somethingness back to the Big Bang. Then how on earth can any great thinker confirm that before this there "is not such thing as nothing at all"? Where's the evidence for this?

"What we think of as empty space in our universe is not actually nothing; it contains energy, radiation and particles that flit in and out of existence. It has properties: it can expand and contract, warp and bend."


What I can't wrap my head around here is that what seems to be construed of as "empty space" already exists in our own somethingness. So it's not like the "energy, radiation and particles" are flitting in and out of literal nothingness. It's occuring in the space that we can already confirm exists.

Lawrence Krauss’s more nuanced explanation of the origins of the universe imply that there was in fact something to begin with, namely gravity and the quantum ‘vacuum’, from which the universe was born. But of course we then wind up in circular reasoning ad infinitum with the question of where the pre-universe materials arose from…


Of course what does it mean to actually pin down a "nuanced explanation" given all of the "unknown unknowns" still out of reach? Eventually the arguments become just that: speculative assumptions going around and around in circles. I think this therefore that is true. But nothing this nor that seem able to be substantiated beyond the assumptions themselves.

And then [of course] this part:

"Others claim that the universe is inexplicable and there will never be an answer to the question. But Bertrand Russell’s assertion that “I should say that the universe is just there, and that’s all” is ultimately an unsatisfying and disappointing response. How can we, as reasoning and self-aware beings, not question how our universe came to be and why it exists at all? It’s a fascinating and mind-bending interplay between physics, theology, and philosophy, which undoubtedly the human race will long continue to ponder."


This clearly bothers some more than others. In many ways the answers haven't much to do with the lives that we live. They don't appear able to make either the pleasure or the pain of existing from day to day go away. It's just that existentially some tumble [or stumble] into experiences that bring out and about this "need" to know these things.

It all gets entangled in the search for meaning. And, in particular, in world where death and oblivion are always out there...just beyond [or way beyond] either our understanding or control.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby Meno_ » Thu Dec 27, 2018 9:01 pm

I think that's right. In fact I think that it's more likely them not that the something we experience is reducible to ever smaller bits of physical reality, toward a minima of the thinkable, where the absolute nothingness is con eibable like a kind of gyroscope of directional index. It never approaches an absolute since that is an indigenous state of the very required transformation , within which consciousnesa through thought through language develops.

At that inconceivable level the reduction through thought through conscious language reduces not merely the linguistic artifacts, but the reality of quantum states as well, where the sub-strata underlying both have become undifferentiable , therefore of similar or identical energy based.

At that point, the system transforms into a fed back function, that reinforces the idea of an eternally recorded/recurred manifestation.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby iambiguous » Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:35 pm

Meno_ wrote:I think that's right. In fact I think that it's more likely them not that the something we experience is reducible to ever smaller bits of physical reality, toward a minima of the thinkable, where the absolute nothingness is con eibable like a kind of gyroscope of directional index. It never approaches an absolute since that is an indigenous state of the very required transformation , within which consciousnesa through thought through language develops.

At that inconceivable level the reduction through thought through conscious language reduces not merely the linguistic artifacts, but the reality of quantum states as well, where the sub-strata underlying both have become undifferentiable , therefore of similar or identical energy based.

At that point, the system transforms into a fed back function, that reinforces the idea of an eternally recorded/recurred manifestation.



I still have no way in which to grasp these points until you at least make an attempt intertwine them in the life that you live. In other words, how you imagine the day to day interactions between your own particular "I" and the "system". The role that language plays in either clarifying or obfuscating actual existential relationships.

On the other hand, sure, I do recognize just how difficult this can be when we go all the way out on the metaphysical limb. "I" in the context of "all there is"?

Where to even begin, right? Which context would actually get us closer to even barely understanding the answers to questions this mind-boggling.

The mind is boggled. So, just leave it at that?
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 33095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby Meno_ » Sat Dec 29, 2018 5:36 am

iambiguous wrote:
Meno_ wrote:I think that's right. In fact I think that it's more likely then not that the something we experience is reducible to ever smaller bits of physical reality, toward a minima of the thinkable, where the absolute nothingness is con patiple like a kind of gyroscope of directional index. It never approaches an absolute since that is an indigenous state of the very required transformation , within which consciousnesa through thought through language develops.

At that inconceivable level the reduction through thought through conscious language reduces not merely the linguistic artifacts, but the reality of quantum states as well, where the sub-strata underlying both have become undifferentiable , therefore of similar or identical energy based.

At that point, the system tranosforms into a fed back function, that reinforces the idea of an eternally recorded/recurred manifestation.



I still have no way in which to grasp these points until you at least make an attempt intertwine them in the life that you live. In other words, how you imagine the day to day interactions between your own particular "I" and the "system". The role that language plays in either clarifying or obfuscating actual existential relationships.

On the other hand, sure, I do recognize just how difficult this can be when we go all the way out on the metaphysical limb. "I" in the context of "all there is"?

Where to even begin, right? Which context would actually get us closer to even barely understanding the answers to questions this mind-boggling.

The mind is boggled. So, just leave it at that?





No of course not, will rewrite a different manner .


Maybe the formally defined relation ship between philosophy and psychology would be a better starting point.

Psychology is a spin off from metaphysics, where ontology best represents the logic of the psyche, in which logic of the psyche. Is mirrored, as an analysand.

Take the parts into which we have treated the psyche, the parts in the ages of metaphysical quandary, at which philosophical inquiry manifests the modern aspects of the philosophy of mind, and existentialism becomes the most particular stage where this literally and figuratively becomes an inquiry into existentialism.

Pjenomenology, formally embedded in existence as the relationship between Husserl and Sartre, becomes manifest.

Philosophical existentialism particulates from reduction, of phenomenon, the psychological automaton or equivalence here is regression into broader generalization, or, participation into larger and larger bounded associations of what is understood to belong categorically.

When most broadly, and formally understood, it becomes a matter through preception, manifested by qualities, such as philosophers have defined them before psychology such as extension.

Starting there, in terms of what came to be known as regression, at the level of reduction of the phenomena.( Psychological regression corresponding to philosophical reduction)

At the reduced epoche the undifferentiated or the more transcendental level, symbolism is more literal , logical and determined. The same with the more psychologic. notionless understandable interpretion in terms of more abstract representation, where abstraction can be visualized in its aesthetic sense.

Abstract art , some claim is hard to understand, as it looses its being, since it is a form of more inclusive generalization. Primitive art retreats into what Levi Strauss defines as saturated within a 'participatuon mystique' where more perception is embedded within common sense, understood in its mos telementary mode, of relying on larger participants to determine meaning through wider participatory experience.

The history of philosophy is mirrored similarity, and the critical philosophy embedded in Kant"s critiques, try to sow this up completely, this progressive development of differentiation, albeit unsuccessfully the moderns, in particular, the positive linguists claim, this is because there is absolute limits of what language can contain and convey. The mode by which such manifests, is through similitude and not identity.

Just stopping here, to point to the idea that positivists would deny Your claim toward the identity, to solve problems in the existence of 'i' , since the phenomenon , Yours and mine are reducible to the larger, more communal you and I, inasmuch as our Being, is more similar then different from each other.

The thing is, this reduced difference plays a confusing part between my and your experience .

So near to this process, lays exactly what You are concerned about in reducing Your experience more toward down to earth, but as it reduces particular content, it becomes less accessible in terms of manifesting association, relevant to Your and my being.

At this level the praxis and the practice is stalemate and this becomes a basic epoche where there really is no possible exit.

This is where we are, in an existential paradox, embedded between a mystique and a logical linguistic impass,where from, signification becomes a mode of using signs and signals, for identifying movement through time , or, subconsciously manifested interpretations becoming signs of how we at first perceive then think about construct reality.


As reality becomes less transcendable, and transcendent the points of connectibility, the association between points that can be filled , become more rarefied, and observed, before they can begin to be understood. So more and more beginning points need to be presumed, and approach the lower levels of quantum thinking, where the points=particles can no longer be observed, or per received, they become probable existences, similar to a participation mystique, where reliance on established routes need to be assumed as existence , on most probable functions.(re. Levi Strauss)

In art, pointillism requires the viewer to adhere to an aesthetic distance, to be literally connect dots, to enable an interpretation of meaning to evolve.

All said, hopefully, making more 'sense' ok how something manifest more than nothing, becomesmorehands on tangible in this mode of presentation.

Nothingness is assumed to subsist in the lowest realms of cognition, and travel back through reasonable reflection, through re - experience, unavailable, except through psychic break through artificial means, such as psychedelics, which break adopted means of recognition, and through reformulations of adopted patterns.

Nothingness is nothing~but such a state of Being.
Last edited by Meno_ on Sat Dec 29, 2018 4:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Something Instead of Nothing

Postby Meno_ » Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:27 am

sorry can not edit .now its the middle of the night, can't find my glasses, kept awake by sleeplessness caused by my approaching jet lagged sleeplessness of my trio to Hanoi and Cebu.

Will connect / correct when dawn is upon me. Sleeplesness of proposal inducement or some other artificial means is possible for anyone caught in a pattern of long term reliance on drugs.

I think back MagsJ has a forum relating to insomnia.
Last edited by Meno_ on Sat Dec 29, 2018 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot]