Why Physicalism is Wrong

[Dontaskme]

I must admit it really bugs me to listen to people from the west claim western civilization(I presume that's what you mean) was and is fundamentally wrong about everything when it has actually changed the whole history of everything compared to the thousands of years that went before it. It also annoys me that they make this claim without bothering to actually read any western philosophy.

Is that changing of the whole history of everything, a change for the better compared to the thousands of years that went before?

Is todays western philosophy more advanced in intelligence than it was thousands of years ago?

What has changed in the idea put forward that western civilisation has changed the whole history of everything..how has it been changed?

.

[Arising_uk]

Is that changing of the whole history of everything, a change for the better compared to the thousands of years that went before? …

Measurably.

Is todays western philosophy more advanced in intelligence than it was thousands of years ago? …

What do you mean by 'intelligence'?

What has changed in the idea put forward that western civilisation has changed the whole history of everything..how has it been changed?

Nothing has changed in the idea put forward and the main idea was doubt until reasoned facts say otherwise and it produced the Natural Philosophers who changed the world in so many ways its pointless to list them.

[RG1]

...there is no one to experience an experience, there is only this immediate unidentified experiencing ..life is a verb.. no one is living life, it is living itself.

Not so. This is a logical impossibility.--- 'Something' can't happen with 'no-thing' happening.

--- if something is happening, then some-thing is happening
--- a verb is not a verb without its subject.
--- without an actor, there can be no action
--- experiencing can't happen without an experiencer

[Dontaskme]

...there is no one to experience an experience, there is only this immediate unidentified experiencing ..life is a verb.. no one is living life, it is living itself.

Not so. This is a logical impossibility.--- 'Something' can't happen with 'no-thing' happening.

--- if something is happening, then some-thing is happening
--- a verb is not a verb without its subject.
--- without an actor, there can be no action
--- experiencing can't happen without an experiencer

What you are describing is knowledge...everybody knows this.

But not everybody knows this... >

Without awareness, there is no thing to be aware of. Awareness is the ultimate unchanging unborn ground of all being, it has to be first. No thing can exist independent in and of itself, because a thing is a creation of awareness only, which is not a thing. Awareness is like the empty screen on which an image is seen, awareness is the seer, and that which is seen, aka an object, cannot be or see anything. Only awareness sees and be's.

The screen of awareness is the absolute, unlimited. Every thing seen/known .. is an image of that one ..it's one appearing as the many.
That which appears to be born is the mind of knowledge..not awareness. Knowledge is the dream fictional story within and inseparable from the eternal dreamer awareness.

That which is being awared as a thing is not a thing, it is no thing thinging...aka the unknown known.. an image of the imageless..there is zero division, zero distance between subject and object, they define each other as inseparably one in the same moment.



Reality is a verb.

There is nothing known about the Absolute herenow nowhere.

To know is a mentally constructed fictional narrative, a conceptual overlay...in other words, a fake identity...no one is taking on. Knowledge itself is not a 'thing' but rather an abstraction, a product of the imagination...here now nowhere. The distance between knowledge and lack of it is exactly zero. They are 'not two'.

Ask yourself...If there is just everything without beginning nor end infinitely for eternity..to whom is anything happening, anything known, anything born, except to itself alone. ALL ONE

.

[Dontaskme]

Is that changing of the whole history of everything, a change for the better compared to the thousands of years that went before? …

Measurably.

Describe what changes for the better have been actualised here now? that are measurably better compared to thousands of years ago?
So we can all know them, and not just you.

Is todays western philosophy more advanced in intelligence than it was thousands of years ago? …

What do you mean by 'intelligence'?

Ok, forget the word 'intelligence'

What reasoned facts do you have to suggest that natural philosophers have changed the whole history of everything in so many ways?
You can't just assume this is true without giving us some of examples of what those measurably better changes are, so we can all make up our own mind as to whether those facts are true or not... ? In what way have natural philosophers changed the history of everything measurably more better than thousands of years before?

Show some examples please?

What has changed in the idea put forward that western civilisation has changed the whole history of everything..how has it been changed?

Nothing has changed in the idea put forward and the main idea was doubt until reasoned facts say otherwise and it produced the Natural Philosophers who changed the world in so many ways its pointless to list them.

Forget about naming names, I didn't ask for the names of the idea makers. I asked for evidence of the changes for the better that you seem to be assuming?

Explain what you mean by doubt? doubt about what exactly? you are being very vague as ususal about what you are attempting to say..of which I have no idea.

So I'll ask you again...how have Natural Philosophers changed the world in so many ways compared to thousands of years ago...in what way, please give us some examples, don't just say the world has changed for the better in so many ways...It's no good making sweeping arbitrary personal statements without any evidence to back up that claim...

What's changed, how has it changed and why do you think everything has changed for the better? how do you know it has, what are you comparing the now of change to exactly?

.

[Dontaskme]

No thing is being a thing.

All things are being things.

Although it seems the opposite is also true..who knows that all things are being things?

You cannot just make truth statements without backing up the claim with evidence.

.

[Arising_uk]

Describe what changes for the better have been actualised here now? that are measurably better compared to thousands of years ago?
So we can all know them, and not just you. …

Increased life-span for the many, mass-produced books, antibiotics, anaesthetics, surgery, dentistry, sewerage plants and drains, electricity, lighting, steam and electric turbines, flight, sun-tan lotion, radio, television and mass communication in general, satellites, transportation, improved farming, hot and cold running water in the house, indoor toilets, double-glazing, torches, mass produced compasses, watches, numerous new materials, plastic, film, cameras, X-ray machines, ultra-sound scanners, pneumatic tyres, bicycles, arc welding, reinforced concrete, tungsten steel, batteries, computers, kettles, electrical ovens, Cartesian Geometry … the list is endless.

Ok, forget the word 'intelligence'

Not surprised.

What reasoned facts do you have to suggest that natural philosophers have changed the whole history of everything in so many ways?
You can't just assume this is true without giving us some of examples of what those measurably better changes are, so we can all make up our own mind as to whether those facts are true or not... ? In what way have natural philosophers changed the history of everything measurably more better than thousands of years before?

Show some examples please?

...

Forget about naming names, I didn't ask for the names of the idea makers. I asked for evidence of the changes for the better that you seem to be assuming?

See above.

Explain what you mean by doubt? doubt about what exactly? you are being very vague as ususal about what you are attempting to say..of which I have no idea. …

Sorry, bad habit I have of assuming that those who come to Philosophy forums might have bothered to read some.

Descartes Method of Doubt which started the Natural Philosophers upon their path.

So I'll ask you again...how have Natural Philosophers changed the world in so many ways compared to thousands of years ago...in what way, please give us some examples, don't just say the world has changed for the better in so many ways...It's no good making sweeping arbitrary personal statements without any evidence to back up that claim...

What's changed, how has it changed and why do you think everything has changed for the better? how do you know it has, what are you comparing the now of change to exactly?

.

See above.

[Arising_uk]

No thing is being a thing.

All things are being things.

Although it seems the opposite is also true..who knows that all things are being things?

You cannot just make truth statements without backing up the claim with evidence.

.

Your statement is a contradiction so always false, mine is a tautology so always true.

[surreptitious57]

Although it seems the opposite is also true..who knows that all things are being things

Being is a state of existence and as all things exist they are by definition being things

[Dontaskme]

Increased life-span for the many, mass-produced books, antibiotics, anaesthetics, surgery, dentistry, sewerage plants and drains, electricity, lighting, steam and electric turbines, flight, sun-tan lotion, radio, television and mass communication in general, satellites, transportation, improved farming, hot and cold running water in the house, indoor toilets, double-glazing, torches, mass produced compasses, watches, numerous new materials, plastic, film, cameras, X-ray machines, ultra-sound scanners, pneumatic tyres, bicycles, arc welding, reinforced concrete, tungsten steel, batteries, computers, kettles, electrical ovens, Cartesian Geometry … the list is endless.

Thanks for supplying us a list of expamples that show some technological advances and changes for the better in todays modern world.

Does this technology extend to the well being within the sense of a separate self?.. in that does it make us happier, healthier, secure in ourselves and others mentally and physically, are we living in some kind of technological utopia where living standards are making us more civilised and mutally balanced in mind body and spirit, and more accepting of others in every conceivable way regarding attitudes, ethics, teaching, cultural and conditioning differences, are we enlightened and enjoying the fruits of our labours? Do we conscider ourselves more evloved and more innovative than we have ever been in human history? Are we proud of how far we've come? ..Is this the only time in human history that has been conscidered to be better than any other time in history? Have we reached the pinnacle of human creativity and intelligence?




.

[Dontaskme]

Although it seems the opposite is also true..who knows that all things are being things

Being is a state of existence and as all things exist they are by definition being things

But who knows that knowledge?

You have avoided answering the 'who' or the 'what' knows ...''Being is a state of existence and as all things exist they are by definition being things''


.

[Dontaskme]

No thing is being a thing.

All things are being things.

Although it seems the opposite is also true..who knows that all things are being things?

You cannot just make truth statements without backing up the claim with evidence.

.

Your statement is a contradiction so always false, mine is a tautology so always true.

Who knows what is true or false?

.

[Arising_uk]

Who knows what is true or false?

Logic does for the tautologies and contradictions. For the contingencies empiricism seems to be the best approach so far.

[Dontaskme]

Explain what you mean by doubt? doubt about what exactly? you are being very vague as ususal about what you are attempting to say..of which I have no idea. …

Sorry, bad habit I have of assuming that those who come to Philosophy forums might have bothered to read some.

Descartes Method of Doubt which started the Natural Philosophers upon their path.

Hey listen, you've already had a swipe at me about copying other peoples ideas and passing them off as my own. And now look at you. You are basically asking me to do what you previously had disliked ..in that you accused me of copying my ideas from other people.

Just so you know, I have never copied any other persons ideas. I may read and listen to other peoples ideas, but when it comes to my nondual mind, there is no way another persons ideas will alter what only I know to be real and what is true about my reality....I don't care about what other peoples ideas about reality are..only mine, only I know my reality, no one else, unless someone elses ideas about reality matches my own ideas, I'm really not interested.

I was naturally born with the nondual knowledge, it's my own knowledge,why on earth would I take on some other knowledge that is not my own? I wouldn't be living true to myself then would I ?

My parents stuck a label on me at my birth and that's when the search for truth all started for me, I had to deconstruct what I instinctively knew to be a false identity that did not ever feel natural for me.

Stop accusing others of copying and parroting other peoples ideas, when we are all born into a world that encourages it....I mean where have you got all your ideas from regarding philosophy and the things you know in life? It's stupid to say parroting others is not our own knowledge..of course it is, there is only knowledge and no one owns it.

You have frowned upon me for parroting, but fail to see that it's what we all do all the time.

Answer this honestly and truthfully...who told you.. who or what you are? ....who told you anything? hasn't all your knowledge come from others?

If you know something that has not come from others...then where did you get that knowing knowledge from that you only know?
And if it's just your knowledge, then where are you getting it from?

Do you now see the dilemma about the idea of copyright, and how it's just another big fat lie that you have believed in, fallen for hook line and sinker?



.

[Dontaskme]

Who knows what is true or false?

Logic does for the tautologies and contradictions. For the contingencies empiricism seems to be the best approach so far.

Why you continue to use these high sounding concepts to answer a simple question..who knows what is true or false?

You answer ''logic'' knows...great, not really the answer though is it...it is known that the concept ''logic'' is known...now we are nearly there, dig deeper, and tell us ...who knows the known concept?



.