General Philosophy

Posting this in General Philosophy if that fits. My question is this: "Is there any kind of a test (perhaps along the lines of the Turing test) that we could administer to a sentient creature (or a machine) that would allow us to define or determine whether or not the said subject was actually conscious? I don't know,but it seems a central feature of my existence that I tell myself that I do possess consciousness but I cannot see a way to verify this other than to take it as a matter of a priori belief. Could there be any possible tests or is it just the Turing test that might be applicable? Apologies if this question has been aske…

Introduction Abstractial process: A system, object, or its property's transition between states (open, partial open/close, and close). Examples 1. A water bottle: a) no cap on it = open, b) cap on but not locked = partial open / close, and c) cap on and locked = close. 2. Human body and drink: a) thirst for a drink = open, b) partial thirst = partial open / close, and c) not thirst = close. 3. Psychology behaviour in friendship: a) full interaction = open, b) limited interaction = partial open/close, c) no interaction at all = close. 4. Psychology behaviour in learning: a) learning = open, b) partial learning = partial, c) not learning = c…

Science gives power and power requires guidance which philosophy can provides. We say that science has made things better. I have two thoughts on this statement. First, it is not just science, but the good use of science that made things better. Now what is good. Only philosophy can provide the answer. Second if things got better, why is it better - what is good in the first place. Again philosophy, not science gives the answer. Any answer is unscientific. Philosophy is unscientific but unscientific does not mean not true. For instance a mere hypothesis is unscientific, but it can shown to be true later after an experiment. In conclusion, science needs philosophy because …

Please comment on the attached file. Please help me to prove the Logic as sound. I will include your name as co-writer. Knowledge_Organization 4 wo name.pdf

A thought experiment: Suppose I experience the day, the ups and downs, the same as anyone else, held in my ram memory; and I am still me, held in my operating system. But every day, when I wake up I forgot what I did yesterday. I think I would lose an important part of me, so my question is, what part and how important is it?

Has anyone a succinct definition for what is called Art? I have been wondering whether art is an attempt to express ones observations and feelings about one's social environment in as unfiltered a way as possible -using whatever medium comes to hand. Has anyone any other ideas? (is mine too obvious and catch all?) (Is it even possible to be succinct about the subject ?)

What is meta-metaphysics?

DNA is likely designed Many patterns occur in nature without the help of a designer – snowflakes, tornados, hurricanes, sand dunes, stalactites, rivers and ocean waves. These patterns are the natural result of what scientists categorize as chaos and fractals. These things are well-understood and we experience them every day. Codes, however, do not occur without a designer from what the evidence suggest so far. We know of millions of examples of intelligence producing codes, yet non that dont include intelligence. Examples of symbolic codes include music, blueprints, languages like English and Chinese, computer programs, and yes, DNA. The essential distinction is the d…

Hello everyone, for the first time I am posting a little content to this community that I have been following in a while. What you see below is an article attempting to make a "reflection" about the phenomenon of death, seen from a human's perspective, on how the actual phenomenon looks to be completely departed from our common lives. All of this, naturally, brings me one question: does "death" actually works as we always expected, as we always believed it to work? If that's possible, can we deny that someone who is died can't never return back to the life-state despite the various historical evidences showing that it has heppened for at least a very small amount of pop…

Is apathy the answer? I'm not talking about political apathy; although in my lifetime I've only voted once (against Boris), because before him whoever I voted for I always got 'the government', which is basically my point; only fear what immediately and really threatens your future. Obviously the 24 hour news culture isn't helpful, because the only good news they can muster, tends to be added on to the end and treated as a joke.

Again, I ask the same question as before: Is affirmation the same as negation? This time, I'll add a bit of clarification to help certain individuals with their strained understanding 😉: Bob flites/argues that yes = no on all meta-levels, th.i. over-levels, and so makes in particular the following flite: 0. Meta-NOT(object-yes = object-no) (obviously true premise/forestep) 1. Meta-YES(object-yes = object-no) (from (1.) by the law that meta-no = meta-yes) 2. object-yes = object-no after all (a reformulation of (1.) Alice now says: "No, meta-yes ≠ meta-no", to which Bob replies: "True, and since over-meta-yes = over-meta-no, you're saying …

Are we truly free or are we some sort characters, in a game, that are controlled by God. Every decision we've taken, has it really been our choice or was it just fate.

Can the human being, a reproducing, self-willed being, be replicated via technology? Can we create a human being from scratch? If yes, then how? If no, then why not?

So I felt like making a list of things the average person cares about. I think it's pretty all-encompassing, but I'm sure I've left some important things out. These are great examples of why we need to reform the human value system as soon as possible. Note: None of these applies to me -- at least, not intentionally; I like to think that they're a quick composite of the current state of society, and not targeting any group or person in particular. I hope he doesn't know that I'm a virgin. I better get a free sandwich because of this. This thing has no toppings! What do you expect? He's a liberal. What do you expect? He's a conservative. Why did…

Is it possible for a human to exist, without any ability to ask questions? Internally, externally or both. Even when I try to ‘not think,’ I must be internally checking that whichever ‘storage unit,’ let’s call it ‘short term memory,’ for want of anything better/more accurate that I use to hold a thought, is currently, ‘empty.’ Such internal checking would be based on the question ‘am I thinking?’ If I concentrate on the number 2 or the colour blue or a cabbage or a king then surely I have to have previously-stored answers to the questions what is 2, blue, cabbage, king etc. It seems to be that it's all about asking and answering questions, from the moment of birth. I…

I have been to just about every forum there is. What I most often run across is stupidity. Why? Mainly because what I consider to be the fundamental human right of freedom of speech isn't allowed. I see that getting into the finer points of science is what this forum is all about. But without freedom of speech, you are all just well trained slaves. Trained seals flapping your flippers together for treats. Most likely, this doesn't bother you. You may feel that your education is a bigger fish to fry. And from what I have seen, most people want to be led. They prefer fantasy to reality. Nobody really cares what happens. As long as it happens to someone else. Pe…

Dreams are a complex existence, something we still don’t really understand the origins of. However almost everyone has had one at least once and knows the general nature that dreams take on. Dreams are not bound by the logics and rules that dictate reality, because they are devoid of reality. Dreams are devoid of the cause and effect flow of the natural world, with events occurring on the random with no preconceived reason for its occurrence. While we don’t know why dreams happen these are things about the nature of the dreams that can be observed within all of adventures within sleep. We also can bring to focus the most complex of these dreams, the Lucid Drea…

This COVID-19 crisis is like a trampoline of evil. It encompasses all the pillars of global governance, economy, medical, political, and social. That's a bad thing, because a trampoline once disturbed will never stop. It will go on ebbing and swaying. First it was the delta strain, then the strain on the economy came. Then the economy ebbed then lockdown came. Then the lockdown was lifted and the omnicron strain came. A pattern emerges. Medical, social, economy, and social. The terrifying realization is that the only way to stop the trampoline ebbing and swaying is through a equal and opposite force that encompasses all the pillars of global governance. I speak o…

Can it reasonably be said that the main limit is that logic can only show a negative and never a positive? If so are there any other limits?(computing capacity for one?)

Back in 2010 I wrote this brief essay on language and meaning. Please bear with me, as I wrote it back when I was still learning to make my English more accurate and efficient at conveying meaning. So it's perhaps peppered with cliches, and other stylistic sins. And, curiously enough, meaning is all it's about. My preoccupation with meaning. Is it, in the last analysis, something unreachable? Do we have to make do with an internal 'prop', so that we can keep communicating? What I'm interested in here is meaning. Does anyone among you share this preoccupation with language that, if you're serious about it, it has the potential to send you into an infinite loop…

It can inductively be shown that the universe behaves like a language. On the most basic level, everything in the universe can be said to simply be information (regardless of what the universe is composed of on the higher level). Therefore, the universe can be said to be an arrangement of information. Language is also an arrangement of information, more specifically an arrangement that has both syntax and semantics, ergo a logical syntax in order for it to be understood and have meaning. Because the universe can be said to obey laws, it follows that the universe itself has its own type of logical syntax akin to that found in language. Thus, if the universe is really just …

When was the last time that you had an argument with someone? Did either you or the other party end up changing stances by the end? Probably not. More than likely, this is what happened instead: 1. You introduced stance A. 2. They introduced stance B. 3. You provided a fairly sturdy argument for stance A. 4. They provided a fairly transparent argument for stance B -- even if, on the surface, it appeared to have some solidity to it due to its use of platitudes and memorized, regurgitated phrases. 5. The both of you went back and forth for a while, neither budging. Despite their stance being obviously flawed, you couldn't find a way to really hit them over th…

In order to appreciate just how relevant negative feelings are to sentient organisms, it is perhaps necessary to start by defining how analysis of physical qualia should work, then defining which individual qualities, in the abstract, are worth applying the process of pragmatic selection to. Based on my own observations of physical reality, and on the confirming observations of others (even if I must always observe that a person has observed something myself, making all observation slightly suspect, but that's a separate topic), I've found that the quality of sensation is inherently negative, as it could not exist in the absence of discomfort or perceived deprivation (mor…

62 years ago, on February 1960, Eugene Wigner concluded his article of the above title: "The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve." I think it might be interesting to discuss, if there is a better understanding of this miracle now. (Leave the issue of deserving it alone, please )

In both real life and Internet dealings, I often hear people say things like "We humans are so insignificant in the grander scheme of things," or "How important could humanity possibly be? We're sooo arrogant, and yet the universe is soooo big!" It's almost become a cliché at this point, really -- and while it sounds good, or at least gives people philosophy points in social circles, it really isn't anything more complicated than a self-deprecating platitude. Here's a thought: What if our worth, our significance, depends upon something far less trivial than physical mass? I guess I don't get it; what does being relatively small have to do with the significance o…