So, yes, modernism has walked away from the ufo 🛸 hearings unscathed.
Postmodernism retains its big bang anchor.
And the Big Bang
itself is still intact, despite early rumors to the contrary.
It looks like David C’s hard problem of consciousness, and Fred H’s Anthropic problem remain the mainstays of immaterialism.
It’s nice to know that Ibn Arabi holds up immaterialism on the Sufi side.
On strictly immaterialist grounds, no one can hold a candle to the Vedantists. The problem is that all the maya leaves very little room for any narrative.
………..
Oh, dear, I haven’t done my homework.
It would help to review the SEP entry on Idealism.
It is rather thorough, especially on history of the topic.
The two authors enlisted a collaborative effort.
Yes, rumors of the death of idealism may turn out to have been a bit premature.
…………
I should point out, however, that the article is almost entirely retrospective.
Also, I’m not happy with Chalmer’s exclusive focus on the qualitative features of consciousness.
These features are the most superficial aspects of the mind.
I definitely am not including felt meanings amongst these features.
If consciousness has any depth, it is in the dimension of meaning.
This is what sapience is all about.
In this regard, keep in mind Quine’s holism of meaning.
Despite his holism, Quine considered himself to be a logical empiricist, which is virtually oxymoronic with respect to holism.
Holism is a form of monism.
Is it true that monism demands a narrative?
If you allow a temporal dimension, there must be a narrative to hold things together.
Co-dependency also implies a narrational dimension.
Holism demands that our world be small.
…………
No, I don’t think so.
Holism demands something, but not that.
Holism demands a unity of meaning.
All meaning must be relative, but relative to what?
…………..
We share 98.8% of our DNA 🧬 with Bonobos.
This is saying that the difference between sapience and sentience is determined by 60 million base pairs.
This is on the order of one hundredth the size of a smartphone operating system.
Then we have ChatGPT, which employs terabytes of data, and which is not close to being able to replicate general intelligence.
What is going on here?
When will it dawn on some of the smartest folks in the world that the mind might not be reducible to bits and bytes……. or anything else?
If the mind is not reducible, then Darwinism is out the window.
Then what?
Then we are left with a monistic immaterialism….. with Ibn Arabi, etc…… and with a narrative that must include an eschaton.
This is not rocket
science, sports
fans.
It’s just a question of how quickly we want the portals to open.
If it looks like we’re going into a downward spiral, we’d better put the pedal to the metal.
(cont……….)
Yesterday at 8:36 pm by U
» Why are we here?
Sat Nov 23, 2024 7:59 am by dan
» OMF STATE OF THE UNION
Fri Nov 22, 2024 10:22 pm by U
» Disclosure - For U by U
Thu Nov 21, 2024 10:08 pm by U
» The scariest character in all fiction
Thu Nov 21, 2024 6:47 pm by U
» Uanon's Majikal Misery Tour "it's all smiles on the magic school bus"
Sun Nov 10, 2024 9:36 pm by Mr. Janus
» What Music Are You Listening To ?
Sat Nov 09, 2024 12:34 am by U
» Livin Your Best Life
Wed Nov 06, 2024 8:55 am by Post Eschaton Punk
» Baudrillardian hauntology - what are some haunting truths to our reality?
Sun Nov 03, 2024 3:07 pm by dan