HexHammer wrote: Seems like u'r usual nonsens to me.
Thankyou for noticing, just trying to be helpful.
HexHammer wrote: Seems like u'r usual nonsens to me.
If you really wanna be helpful, you could try venture to some other philosophy site and sphew your thoughts there.thedoc wrote:HexHammer wrote: Seems like u'r usual nonsens to me.
Thankyou for noticing, just trying to be helpful.
HexHammer wrote:If you really wanna be helpful, you could try venture to some other philosophy site and sphew your thoughts there.thedoc wrote:HexHammer wrote: Seems like u'r usual nonsens to me.
Thankyou for noticing, just trying to be helpful.
No, I haven't much of a problem with that, though you can say an engine has its own volition, which isn't the same as volition from awareness. So awareness is the most accurate term and I'll stick with that.Andy Kay wrote:Okay, I'm just trying to get a handle on how you're using certain words here. So, in your lexicon, is there a difference between claiming that "Matter isn't the fundamental basis of the universe, awareness is" and claiming that "Matter isn't the fundamental basis of the universe, volition is"?Bernard wrote:Volition and awareness are inextricable Andy
H... Stars are unimaginably aware, and so is the earth. There is no rational way to apprehend such things though. And, no, It is not my 'believing' that allows such statements. It is experiential in ways I would need a lifetime to explain and still get only most of nowhere. Its enough to hopefully point out that life is incredible beyond belief and reason.
For what it's worth, thedoc, I like what you write. Although, I should qualify that by making it clear that I don't necessarily agree with it.thedoc wrote:Too late, I already do, they don't like me either.
Not a problem, I like what I write too, but I don't always agree with it either.uwot wrote:For what it's worth, thedoc, I like what you write. Although, I should qualify that by making it clear that I don't necessarily agree with it.thedoc wrote:Too late, I already do, they don't like me either.
Brilliant!thedoc wrote:... I like what I write too, but I don't always agree with it either.
jackles wrote:where did the word ontology come from.it seems to encompass metaphtsics to a tee.
Please enjoy, it's very rare.uwot wrote:Brilliant!thedoc wrote:... I like what I write too, but I don't always agree with it either.
This is your usual incoherent random thinking, I get to wonder what kind of job one person such as you, have?Hjarloprillar wrote: "Stars are unimaginably aware, and so is the earth. There is no rational way to apprehend such things though. And, no, It is not my 'believing' that allows such statements. It is experiential in ways I would need a lifetime to explain and still get only most of nowhere. Its enough to hopefully point out that life is incredible beyond belief and reason."
Because Hex. While your focus and fascination is laudable.
Stars and planets have no awareness. [the biosphere of earth may].
Such have no ..'life'
To be considered a thinking being. one must learn how to think [about a thing]
"beyond belief and reason" is not a good start
i clean toiletsHexHammer wrote: I get to wonder what kind of job one person such as you, have?