The Philosophy Now Forum

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:18 pm IN SIMPLE TERMS, METAPHYSICS ASKS

What is reality, at its deepest level?
What does it mean for anything to exist?
How does everything hang together?

1. Single sub atomic units flying around creating thoughts.

2. It means that those sub atomic units somehow create thoughts, which indicates, an instinct built into life for self-knowledge. Before I can answer that question I have to have my I am moment and remember it's desires to rule both man and God.

3. Perfectly and the best reality can be, if you know how to look at things the way a Gnostic Christian does.

Be all here so blessed.

Let me speak to the misunderstanding of Gnostic Christians hating matter.
I wrote this to refute the false notion that Gnostic Christians do not like matter and reality that the inquisitors propagated to justify their many murders of my religion’s originators.

The Gnostic Christian reality.
Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all.
[And after they have reigned they will rest.]"

"If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you.

If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.

Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.

[Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father.

But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

As you can see from that quote, if we see God's kingdom all around us and inside of us, we cannot think that the world is anything but evolving perfection. Most just don't see it and live in poverty. Let me try to make you see the world the way I do.

Here is a mind exercise. Tell me what you see when you look around. The best that can possibly be, given our past history, or an ugly and imperfect world?

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:25 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:18 pm IN SIMPLE TERMS, METAPHYSICS ASKS

What is reality, at its deepest level?
What does it mean for anything to exist?
How does everything hang together?

Questions that are apparently beyond human capacity to know the answers to (especially if there's no God). Now what?

What is wrong with pushing the genocidal Gods aside the way Jesus does when ascending in the myth, and do as Jesus said. Elect ourselves a new God.

Jesus tells us in a number of verses that we are to judge all the Gods and be our own best examples of those Gods.

The blind do not read those.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 3:37 pm No, the simplest way would be, manifestly, for you to answer that very simple question.

Do you have any answer? Or do you simply not know what a "Christian" is? And what about a "Catholic"? Do you know what one is?

This is what I think about your position, and thus your particular focus within Christianity. Because that is what you really want to emphasize.

Your emphasis, which also includes moral precepts and commandments, is in “the state of grace” and what you refer to as “salvation”. If the Evangelical Christian (as you are) achieves that state of grace, he is in many senses freed from consequences of actions he takes in the world.

Take as an example (I grant you an exaggerated one) George Bush Jr. Because he is ‘saved’ he can with an uninhibited conscience nevertheless act in the world, make wars, strike certain people or groups. He is “saved” no matter what he does, or what he aligns with. This is the Evangelical frame of mind.

This is, I think, how you view YOURSELF. You are “saved”. You may have many different lines of “complicity” in the world, you may have to take action in the world, or support the action of major players in the world, but you remain unscathed … because you stand in God’s favor.

Otherwise, as a strict Christian, you would be required to extricate yourself from “the world” and from complicity in it. Maybe you are in such a position, I cannot be certain.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:25 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:18 pm IN SIMPLE TERMS, METAPHYSICS ASKS

What is reality, at its deepest level?
What does it mean for anything to exist?
How does everything hang together?

Questions that are apparently beyond human capacity to know the answers to (especially if there's no God). Now what?

The disco!

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 2:48 pm 1. My neighbour is the nicest man you'll ever meet. He's gentle, kind, an excellent father, and would rip off his own arm and hand it to me, if I needed it. You could not find a nicer guy, seriously (this is true, by the way). On Saturday, he takes his whole family to Mass, every week. He kneels in front of the priest, he takes communion, he does penance, he gives generously, he prays and gives thanks to God for every meal he eats.

2. But many mafiosi are also Catholic. They were baptized as infants. They were raised in a Catholic culture, in Sicily, perhaps. But they might darken the door of the Catholic cathedral a couple of times a year. They too have their kids baptized. They too give money to their religion. And when they have somebody "whacked," they maybe cross themselves piously over the body.

A stockholder, say of a typical mutual fund, will hold investments en if relatively minimal, in the machinery and industry of war-production. I could list 100 and even 1,000 examples of what I term “complicity” to illustrate my point about the central issue around which all metaphysical systems revolve.

In this sense we all have “links” with the Mafia. To the degree that we are invested in earthly enterprises, we are invested inevitably in injustice. Full stop. As I have pointed out: even cultivating a field, as an act, involves displacement of life. Similarly, all hunan construction from large civic projects to the establishment of a nation, involve acts that are defined as antithetical to Christian values. All ownership (in affairs of the world) involve compromises of values. To be in a position of ownership, or to be invested in one’s nation, involve consequential actions that at a strict ethical level cannot be defended without amazing rhetorical back-flips and compromising justifications.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:53 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:25 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:18 pm IN SIMPLE TERMS, METAPHYSICS ASKS

What is reality, at its deepest level?
What does it mean for anything to exist?
How does everything hang together?

Questions that are apparently beyond human capacity to know the answers to (especially if there's no God). Now what?

The disco!

Gary! That’s it! That’s what you are looking for! One big gay disco!

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:03 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 3:37 pm

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 3:09 pm
The simplest way for you to understand my answer to this question would be, for example, to read one of Christopher Dawson’s books

No, the simplest way would be, manifestly, for you to answer that very simple question.

Do you have any answer? Or do you simply not know what a "Christian" is? And what about a "Catholic"? Do you know what one is?

I give up. I don't know. What is a Christian?

I suggest we take the word literallly: "Christian" literally means "little Christ." So if somebody behaved as a "little Christ," I think we can call them a "Christian" to that extent. But if they behaved like a Crusader, and Inquisitor or a Fascist instead, I think we have good, empirical reasons for putting into question any claim that they were "Christian."

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:47 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 3:37 pm No, the simplest way would be, manifestly, for you to answer that very simple question.

Do you have any answer? Or do you simply not know what a "Christian" is? And what about a "Catholic"? Do you know what one is?

...that is what you really want to emphasize.

No. I'm just looking for your answer. I'm not getting it yet.

What, according to you, is a "Christian?"

And which of the two men I described to you is, in your view, a "Catholic"?

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 5:09 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 2:48 pm 1. My neighbour is the nicest man you'll ever meet. He's gentle, kind, an excellent father, and would rip off his own arm and hand it to me, if I needed it. You could not find a nicer guy, seriously (this is true, by the way). On Saturday, he takes his whole family to Mass, every week. He kneels in front of the priest, he takes communion, he does penance, he gives generously, he prays and gives thanks to God for every meal he eats.

2. But many mafiosi are also Catholic. They were baptized as infants. They were raised in a Catholic culture, in Sicily, perhaps. But they might darken the door of the Catholic cathedral a couple of times a year. They too have their kids baptized. They too give money to their religion. And when they have somebody "whacked," they maybe cross themselves piously over the body.

In this sense we all have “links” with the Mafia.

So there's no such thing as a Catholic? Or all Catholics are mafia linked?

To the degree that we are invested in earthly enterprises, we are invested inevitably in injustice.

No, that's clearly not the case. One "earthly enterprise" would be to build something. If you pay your workers, and if the building is a net gain for many people, so that they have a new place to live, where is the "injustice"?

All ownership (in affairs of the world) involve compromises of values.

I see absolutely no reason to suppose that's true. You'll have to defend that claim.

But now, answer the question. You were talking about "Catholics." I want to know what you meant by using the term. Was it #1, #2, or both?

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:53 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 4:25 pm Questions that are apparently beyond human capacity to know the answers to (especially if there's no God). Now what?

The disco!

someone call the chiropractor...

-Imp

In my experience, metaphysics doesn't operate in a domain where we can say a certain event or outcome is actually metaphysical. If we claim something is metaphysical, it usually collapses into another subject, such as religion, spirituality, or esotericism.

Consequently, when someone claims to be a metaphysicist, from my perspective the label carries no more practical meaning than witch or wizard.

However, I could be mistaken. If I am, can any of the interlocutors provide a sound example of a distinctly metaphysical conclusive answer?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 6:47 pm No. I'm just looking for your answer. I'm not getting it yet.

What, according to you, is a "Christian?"

And which of the two men I described to you is, in your view, a "Catholic"?

No, you are definitely not getting what you try to get by force. I detest the forum ploy: "Get down here right now and answer the question I pose!"

You know by now that I do not participate in those games.

I am interested in statements that you make about Christianity, what it is, how it is lived, etc. So, answer your own question.

As far as your Christianity goes, the very essence of it gleaned from what you write, resolves to exactly what I stated: You believe you are 'saved' (i.e. in a state of Grace) and as a result of that state or condition the repercussions of your various complicities in earthly processes is nullified. I have explained this by way of numerous examples. I think this belief is extremely questionable.

I also answered your question about the mafioso vs your pious neighbor. Your pious neighbor I assume is a 'good man' (and this is not easy to achieve), but the issue of complicity extends much farther beyond our day-to-day actions. In no sense do I minimize our day-to-day actions! But in the largest possible sense the Christian vision or its ethics implicates man in considerations that extend far beyond pious goodness.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 7:33 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 6:47 pm No. I'm just looking for your answer. I'm not getting it yet.

What, according to you, is a "Christian?"

And which of the two men I described to you is, in your view, a "Catholic"?

No, you are definitely not getting what you try to get by force.

"Force"? Oh, chum...you'll have to explain to me how posing a simple question online amounts to "force." How weak is somebody who thinks that's "force"?

I also answered your question about the mafioso vs your pious neighbor. Your pious neighbor I assume is a 'good man' (and this is not easy to achieve), but the issue of complicity extends much farther beyond our day-to-day actions. In no sense do I minimize our day-to-day actions! But in the largest possible sense the Christian vision or its ethics implicates man in considerations that extend far beyond pious goodness.

I didn't ask any of this. I simply asked whether you thought #1, #2 or both, or neither is what you would call a "Catholic" when you used the word.

If it's neither, then just say what your definition of "Catholic" is.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 6:51 pm So there's no such thing as a Catholic? Or all Catholics are mafia linked?

For my part there are two levels to my personal interest in these questions. One, the entire cultural sweep and the creation of Europe as a manifestation of Christian culture in all its aspect is my area of interest. Both because it is simply fascinating, but also because it is, for different reasons, vital to my own being and self-interest. Obviously, IC, there is a definition available as to 'What Catholicism is" and what it demands. You can find that, and anyone can find that, simply by tapping your fingers in Google of now into an AI program. You can also read a Catechism where a moral and ethical outline, and a Manuel for 'correct devotion', proper behavior at Mass, one's relations to one's wife, family and children, and a general 'social doctrine' are all outlined. So, there is not value to 'answering' your question. The answers are there.

I am trying to point out to you that as it pertains to Europe, and to the destruction of the cohesion of Europe, and to the present conditions that Europe now faces -- as the matrix of Catholicism and Christianity -- will not be solved by mere pieties. Such as proper genuflection or any accoutrement that attends devotional life.

This is why I responded to your simplistic binary about Pious Catholic Neighbor vs Bloodthirsty Catholic Mafioso as I did. The pious neighbor is HIMSELF implicated in all that I am defining as complicity, just as you indeed are, but about which you do not wish to face. The interesting thing would be for you to come to a point of recognizing complicity. And instead of presenting yourself as the Ultimate Guide here, and demanding that I or anyone else "answer your damned questions", would recognize and acknowledge that you are being responded to. But in my case 'according to my own lights'.

There is a great deal of performed bullshit going on in our present where people focus on what is somewhat minor and neglect what is entirely major. Now, if you wish that I explain more of what I mean I invite you to converse. But not to dictate.

The second level here is, as I continually state and repeat, where a man stands on an INNER LEVEL. One can perform all the exterior pieties in the largest Manuel of Catholic (or Christian) Procedure and 'perform correctly', but still it all seems to depend on what is in one's own heart if I may insert the cliche. If there is such a thing as 'conversion' ,it is not an external affair, it is an internal affair and a willingness to respond.

Your *questions*, IC, are insulting.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2026 7:43 pm "Force"? Oh, chum...you'll have to explain to me how posing a simple question online amounts to "force." How weak is somebody who thinks that's "force"?

With you, IC, there is absolutely no such thing as a simple question. And there is a new twist: Your comprehension of what Catholicism and Christianity may ask and require of a person may well demand more than you understand if the moral and ethical imperatives are carried forward. All this I have written very clearly. And none of it have you nor will you respond to.