Philosophy Now Forum

.


.




Through science & the breakdown of the bicameral mind we have effectively eliminated time and space.


We have created a one world economy.

We will be continuing to expand a one world government.

We are beginning to understand that we all share the same biosphere. We all must share and protect our only earth and all of her inhabitants.


In a new humanity will we be able to be more conscious of ourselves...more self-conscious of our not-selves and less attached?




More empathy?


More civility?


.

more radiation

-Imp

I think that we are arriving at what Hegel called Absolute Knowing My project on it:
https://www.academia.edu/7347240/Our_Co ... _Dialectic

.




Did you write that?


If you did why?





Where is the conclusion & why wasn't it included in the original text?




What do you do?



Where do you live?



How old are you?






.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.




Did you write that?


If you did why?





Where is the conclusion & why wasn't it included in the original text?

Perhaps it is a working paper.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:

What do you do?



Where do you live?



How old are you?

Bill, what do these questions have to do with his dissertation? Or are you just curious?

.



I wanted to see beneath his dissertation...




No one here is going to read the entire work no matter how much time we have available to waste.




I looked for the author's conclusion almost immediately because if you actually brief the paper you can feel that the focus is convoluted. Baffling with bullshit is a phrase that comes to mind.




I just wanted to get a feel for who this person is and in what stage of life.







.

It does deal with a lot of themes. However, just because you find it baffling doesn't make it BS. It is actually quite readable if you make your way though it.

.



OK, what did you take from it?


What is your conclusion?




.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.



OK, what did you take from it?


What is your conclusion?




.

I'm about half way through so I don't have a conclusion, but I do have a take on it.

I think it is a metaphysical explanation for the nature of reality. In other posts I mentioned it had parallels with the Hameroff-Penrose thesis and quantum consciousness. I did mention Godel and Orch_OR in my response to Greylorn.

The Hameroff-Penrose thesis is incomplete because it takes into account observations and experiments of a scientific nature while at the same time exploring the metaphysical implications. When we use philosophers such as Kant, Hegel, Plato in order to explain the nature of reality we are doing metaphysics, so it is possible to put forward a coherent thesis and this is probably what is happening in the case of Volatileworld. This is basically what metaphysical ontology does.

At this stage it appears to be theory of quantum consciousness.

.



Thanks. I think I have a take on what both you and the original poster actually understand now.




...especially the 1, 2, & 3 part.




.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.



Thanks. I think I have a take on what both you and the original poster actually understand now.




...especially the 1, 2, & 3 part.




.

Yes I think the theory raises more questions than it answers, so I see the rationalwiki highlighting some important objections. Nonetheless, some of these objections can be answered.

You've never read Hegel? People change all the time x)

.



...............................If people change all the time then, can you unread Hegel?



.

Uhm... I guess I could at my best try to ignore what Hegel read, but no, you can't "unread" somebody, everything you read is stuck inside of you in some way or another.

.



................................Really?...When you undressed yesterday, what were you wearing?



.