The Foundation of Everything is Occurence

[Belinda]

Eodnhodj wrote:

"Experience just occurs."

But experience does not pertain to inanimate objects. Inanimate objects are not subjects of experience.

Great observation and good point.

Existence, however, pertains to absolutely ALL and Everything.

Therefore, the foundation of Everything could well be Existence, instead.

Indeed that is the BIG question: why does anything exist?

[Belinda]

Eodnhodj wrote:

"Experience just occurs."

But experience does not pertain to inanimate objects. Inanimate objects are not subjects of experience.

Indeed the defining attribute of a subject of experience is that the subject of experience knows (from privileged access to specific feelings )what he experiences. Memories may be false, and Descartes' hypothetical demon may deceive, but the subject and only the subject, is subject to experiences.

(NB subject is not coterminous with self. )

That is your experience and it is contradictory as your experience occurs because of objects. Your experience of the objects makes them an extension of you.

These two sentences contradict each other. Either objects are reality, or mind is reality.

[Age]

Eodnhodj wrote:

"Experience just occurs."

But experience does not pertain to inanimate objects. Inanimate objects are not subjects of experience.

Great observation and good point.

Existence, however, pertains to absolutely ALL and Everything.

Therefore, the foundation of Everything could well be Existence, instead.

Indeed that is the BIG question: why does anything exist?

1. Everything HAS TO EXIST. There can be NO OTHER WAY.

2. Why does EVERY thing exist is so that (the) 'I' can bear witness to the beauty that 'I' AM CREATING.

[Belinda]

Great observation and good point.

Existence, however, pertains to absolutely ALL and Everything.

Therefore, the foundation of Everything could well be Existence, instead.

Indeed that is the BIG question: why does anything exist?

1. Everything HAS TO EXIST. There can be NO OTHER WAY.

2. Why does EVERY thing exist is so that (the) 'I' can bear witness to the beauty that 'I' AM CREATING.

I agree with 1. I disagree with 2.

2. I object to final cause reasoning. While the feeling you express makes life worthwhile for you and shows you are a good man, final cause is not objectively true except as an item of faith.

[Age]

Indeed that is the BIG question: why does anything exist?

1. Everything HAS TO EXIST. There can be NO OTHER WAY.

2. Why does EVERY thing exist is so that (the) 'I' can bear witness to the beauty that 'I' AM CREATING.

I agree with 1. I disagree with 2.

PERFECTLY UNDERSTANDABLE.

2. I object to final cause reasoning. While the feeling you express makes life worthwhile for you and shows you are a good man, final cause is not objectively true except as an item of faith.

But, when, and IF, 'you' find out WHO and WHAT the 'I' IS, EXACTLY, THEN 'you' WILL SEE, and UNDERSTAND, things, here, VERY DIFFERENTLY.

[Eodnhoj7]

Eodnhodj wrote:

"Experience just occurs."

But experience does not pertain to inanimate objects. Inanimate objects are not subjects of experience.

Indeed the defining attribute of a subject of experience is that the subject of experience knows (from privileged access to specific feelings )what he experiences. Memories may be false, and Descartes' hypothetical demon may deceive, but the subject and only the subject, is subject to experiences.

(NB subject is not coterminous with self. )

That is your experience and it is contradictory as your experience occurs because of objects. Your experience of the objects makes them an extension of you.

These two sentences contradict each other. Either objects are reality, or mind is reality.

How do either contradict when both are experienced and both occur?

Reality is purely occurence, even a hallucination occurs as the reality of a hallucination.

The mind cannot percieve without an object thus the mind exists because of objects.

[Age]

That is your experience and it is contradictory as your experience occurs because of objects. Your experience of the objects makes them an extension of you.

These two sentences contradict each other. Either objects are reality, or mind is reality.

How do either contradict when both are experienced and both occur?

Reality is purely occurence, even a hallucinations occurs as the reality of a hallucinations.

The mind cannot percieve without an object thus the mind exists because of objects.

LOL The MORE you 'TRY TO' COUNTER your CONTRADICTIONS the MORE you CONTRADICT "yourself".

And, if you, or another, would like to KNOW WHEN and HOW you just CONTRADICTED "yourself" AGAIN, here, then just let me know, okay.

[Eodnhoj7]

Need someone to refute this thesis.

[popeye1945]

Biology is the measure and the meaning of all things; it is the subjective experiences we can never escape. Biological consciousness is the basis of apparent reality, read the basis of the object and the physically apparent world, as far as we know. As far as we know, knowing is utterly subjective. We do not experience what is, what we experience is how what is affects us or alters the standing state of our biological selves, for all is energy, frequencies, and vibrations, out of these, plus biology emerges apparent reality. Occurrence is the effects of energy as biological experience.

[Belinda]

Eodnhoj, subjective experiences are real. Objective experiences are real.
Hallucination is not objectively real but is subjectively real, and that people sometimes hallucinate is objectively real.

This has no bearing on whether or not all experience is mental or whether it's material. Experience is both mental and physical depending on how you talk about the experience. E.g. "We are all agreed that these bottles of milk are past their sell -by date" is socially subjective. " Whereas "Tests show these bottles of milk are past their sell-by date" is objective. "I can smell this milk is past its sell-by date and don't need to read the label or scientific tests to tell me" is subjective.

Idealists such as Popeye, above, are more sceptical than materialists.

[Eodnhoj7]

Biology is the measure and the meaning of all things; it is the subjective experiences we can never escape. Biological consciousness is the basis of apparent reality, read the basis of the object and the physically apparent world, as far as we know. As far as we know, knowing is utterly subjective. We do not experience what is, what we experience is how what is affects us or alters the standing state of our biological selves, for all is energy, frequencies, and vibrations, out of these, plus biology emerges apparent reality. Occurrence is the effects of energy as biological experience.

If we cannot escape subjective experiences than how can you say biology is the measure of all things without speaking only for yourself?

[Eodnhoj7]

Eodnhoj, subjective experiences are real. Objective experiences are real.
Hallucination is not objectively real but is subjectively real, and that people sometimes hallucinate is objectively real.

This has no bearing on whether or not all experience is mental or whether it's material. Experience is both mental and physical depending on how you talk about the experience. E.g. "We are all agreed that these bottles of milk are past their sell -by date" is socially subjective. " Whereas "Tests show these bottles of milk are past their sell-by date" is objective. "I can smell this milk is past its sell-by date and don't need to read the label or scientific tests to tell me" is subjective.

Idealists such as Popeye, above, are more sceptical than materialists.

I keep it simple. Experience occurs. Different types of experiences occur. What we know is that these things occur because this knowing occurs, occurences occur through occurences as an occurence.

[popeye1945]

Biology is the measure and the meaning of all things; it is the subjective experiences we can never escape. Biological consciousness is the basis of apparent reality, read the basis of the object and the physically apparent world, as far as we know. As far as we know, knowing is utterly subjective. We do not experience what is, what we experience is how what is affects us or alters the standing state of our biological selves, for all is energy, frequencies, and vibrations, out of these, plus biology emerges apparent reality. Occurrence is the effects of energy as biological experience.

If we cannot escape subjective experiences then how can you say biology is the measure of all things without speaking only for yourself?

A subjective perspective is the only way that we know anything; we do not sense what is out there, we sense how what is out there affects/alters our standing biology. We can say that biology is the measure and the meaning of all things, because our everyday reality/apparent reality is a biological readout. Think of it this way, the world, the cosmos, is energy, and that energy plays upon our biology as if it were an instrument. The melody energy plays upon us as an instrument is apparent/everyday reality. The physical world is meaningless in the absence of a conscious subject. From our experiences, we derive meanings relevant to our standing biology, which we then bestow/attribute to what we perceive to be out there. Subjectivity is the only way we know a world, and even the objective world of objects is a subjective creation. We do not truly experience what is out there, only how what is out there affects us, giving us experience through changes in our biological natures. An added thought, meaning, knowledge is the property of the conscious subject and never the property of the object; life, humanity bestows meanings to what it experiences, for experience is knowledge.

[Eodnhoj7]

Biology is the measure and the meaning of all things; it is the subjective experiences we can never escape. Biological consciousness is the basis of apparent reality, read the basis of the object and the physically apparent world, as far as we know. As far as we know, knowing is utterly subjective. We do not experience what is, what we experience is how what is affects us or alters the standing state of our biological selves, for all is energy, frequencies, and vibrations, out of these, plus biology emerges apparent reality. Occurrence is the effects of energy as biological experience.

If we cannot escape subjective experiences then how can you say biology is the measure of all things without speaking only for yourself?

A subjective perspective is the only way that we know anything; we do not sense what is out there, we sense how what is out there affects/alters our standing biology. We can say that biology is the measure and the meaning of all things, because our everyday reality/apparent reality is a biological readout. Think of it this way, the world, the cosmos, is energy, and that energy plays upon our biology as if it were an instrument. The melody energy plays upon us as an instrument is apparent/everyday reality. The physical world is meaningless in the absence of a conscious subject. From our experiences, we derive meanings relevant to our standing biology, which we then bestow/attribute to what we perceive to be out there. Subjectivity is the only way we know a world, and even the objective world of objects is a subjective creation. We do not truly experience what is out there, only how what is out there affects us, giving us experience through changes in our biological natures. An added thought, meaning, knowledge is the property of the conscious subject and never the property of the object; life, humanity bestows meanings to what it experiences, for experience is knowledge.

If subjective experience is the only way "we" know anything, and that is your subjective experience than how can use say "we" without making subjective experience a paradoxical objective reality.

[Phil8659]

If we cannot escape subjective experiences then how can you say biology is the measure of all things without speaking only for yourself?

A subjective perspective is the only way that we know anything; we do not sense what is out there, we sense how what is out there affects/alters our standing biology. We can say that biology is the measure and the meaning of all things, because our everyday reality/apparent reality is a biological readout. Think of it this way, the world, the cosmos, is energy, and that energy plays upon our biology as if it were an instrument. The melody energy plays upon us as an instrument is apparent/everyday reality. The physical world is meaningless in the absence of a conscious subject. From our experiences, we derive meanings relevant to our standing biology, which we then bestow/attribute to what we perceive to be out there. Subjectivity is the only way we know a world, and even the objective world of objects is a subjective creation. We do not truly experience what is out there, only how what is out there affects us, giving us experience through changes in our biological natures. An added thought, meaning, knowledge is the property of the conscious subject and never the property of the object; life, humanity bestows meanings to what it experiences, for experience is knowledge.

If subjective experience is the only way "we" know anything, and that is your subjective experience than how can use say "we" without making subjective experience a paradoxical objective reality.

"subjective experience" ain't you got no grammar?
is experience divided by the intelligible, or by actual sense organs?