Does reality really exist?

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by RJG »

Lambert wrote:Wow, somewhere I think that they should burn universities long before they should burn churches if you think that our experiences are real. Perception are mere images that the beholder must actuate to understand, and that is achieved when the apple is identified as the reason why we think that our experiences are real.
How does one ‘know’ that “perceptions are mere images…”? How does one “identify” this apple “as the reason…”?

Doesn't it take experiences (thoughts, feelings, or sensory experiences) to ‘know’ or ‘identify’? If so, then what is really real? What is first and foremost? EXPERIENCES are.

Therefore, it is the ‘experience’ (of the apple) that is real. The reality of the apple is undetermined, and can only be assumed via pure speculation.
Granth
Posts: 2084
Joined: July 20th, 2012, 11:56 pm

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Granth »

Reality is an illusion and so is illusion which makes me f***ked, oh dear what can I do...
Lambert
Posts: 1061
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 11:55 am

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Lambert »

Granth wrote:Reality is an illusion and so is illusion which makes me f***ked, oh dear what can I do...
That is the paradox of life in which we think we are and therefore must think to be, while in I AM we just are. This is where a jump-shift is made from Yang to Yin in the merger of two opposites that Hardy wrote about in this poem that takes place inside the mind of man:http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/176678

This poem tell us that the collision course is real as designed by the Immanent Will, in time, for which a life-houseboat is needed to collide. And so the event is real as presented here between two opposites that humans carry about from day to day in which the Spinner of the Years says "NOW," and not the evangelist to say.

Then if you wonder why they burn churches in China every second day because proselytizing is not allowed, it would follow that the best is yet to come for them (just to bring the cows home here).

-- Updated March 1st, 2015, 9:35 am to add the following --
RJG wrote:
Lambert wrote:Wow, somewhere I think that they should burn universities long before they should burn churches if you think that our experiences are real. Perception are mere images that the beholder must actuate to understand, and that is achieved when the apple is identified as the reason why we think that our experiences are real.
How does one ‘know’ that “perceptions are mere images…”? How does one “identify” this apple “as the reason…”?

Doesn't it take experiences (thoughts, feelings, or sensory experiences) to ‘know’ or ‘identify’? If so, then what is really real? What is first and foremost? EXPERIENCES are.

Therefore, it is the ‘experience’ (of the apple) that is real. The reality of the apple is undetermined, and can only be assumed via pure speculation.
Experiences is what loads our Camel as we set out in the journey of life towards the oasis that we see, and if we do not see that on our own as the 'little big shiner' in our private domain in which we think we are, it will be woman in us who sends us in that direction via the Determinate cause in us. That so is in which we are created equal with the same destiny in mind. So created equal means only with destiny in mind that in this way is the same for all, and that will be ours in the Spinner of Years that we cannot avoid because our days are numbered, so we say, and keep track on the calendar so we can celebrate as the years go by and we have good cause to celebrate.

And of course we are ambitious and we do very well, each in our own, and as determinant you say that our experiences are real, and will swear by that to say, but in effect are only relevant to our domain and we make the most of it while we can. I fully agree with you, and that is how Titanic's are build by design in our own way, but nevertheless are set on that same collision course in life because we also have destiny in mind and therefore count our days.

So then as camel jockey the time will come that this camel must be converted into lion and that is what this collision at sea is all about. From there we become the lion as the solitary individual to find the oasis on our own -- and here now the idea that "God has no grand children" comes to mind and so we will be on our own. In any event, that is how I see it to be for us (and then I sometimes wonder what the evangelical wing is all about, as in "I am a credit to his name?" (the f#cking idiot I say, while he is actually fornicating people to that great commission in their own life, and that is what burning churches in China is all about)).

Sorry, I am not violent, but just wonder why China/Russia and USA/the West are so very different in this respect.
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by RJG »

Lambert wrote:Experiences is what loads our Camel as we set out in the journey of life towards the oasis that we see, and if we do not see that on our own as the 'little big shiner' in our private domain in which we think we are, it will be woman in us who sends us in that direction via the Determinate cause in us. That so is in which we are created equal with the same destiny in mind. So created equal means only with destiny in mind that in this way is the same for all, and that will be ours in the Spinner of Years that we cannot avoid because our days are numbered, so we say, and keep track on the calendar so we can celebrate as the years go by and we have good cause to celebrate.

And of course we are ambitious and we do very well, each in our own, and as determinant you say that our experiences are real, and will swear by that to say, but in effect are only relevant to our domain and we make the most of it while we can. I fully agree with you, and that is how Titanic's are build by design in our own way, but nevertheless are set on that same collision course in life because we also have destiny in mind and therefore count our days.

So then as camel jockey the time will come that this camel must be converted into lion and that is what this collision at sea is all about. From there we become the lion as the solitary individual to find the oasis on our own -- and here now the idea that "God has no grand children" comes to mind and so we will be on our own. In any event, that is how I see it to be for us (and then I sometimes wonder what the evangelical wing is all about, as in "I am a credit to his name?" (the f#cking idiot I say, while he is actually fornicating people to that great commission in their own life, and that is what burning churches in China is all about)).

Sorry, I am not violent, but just wonder why China/Russia and USA/the West are so very different in this respect.
Lambert, how can you "know" this stuff, if not for (the reality of) experiences?

Without experiences, NOTHING exists!
Lambert
Posts: 1061
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 11:55 am

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Lambert »

RJG wrote:
Lambert wrote:Experiences is what loads our Camel as we set out in the journey of life towards the oasis that we see, and if we do not see that on our own as the 'little big shiner' in our private domain in which we think we are, it will be woman in us who sends us in that direction via the Determinate cause in us. That so is in which we are created equal with the same destiny in mind. So created equal means only with destiny in mind that in this way is the same for all, and that will be ours in the Spinner of Years that we cannot avoid because our days are numbered, so we say, and keep track on the calendar so we can celebrate as the years go by and we have good cause to celebrate.

And of course we are ambitious and we do very well, each in our own, and as determinant you say that our experiences are real, and will swear by that to say, but in effect are only relevant to our domain and we make the most of it while we can. I fully agree with you, and that is how Titanic's are build by design in our own way, but nevertheless are set on that same collision course in life because we also have destiny in mind and therefore count our days.

So then as camel jockey the time will come that this camel must be converted into lion and that is what this collision at sea is all about. From there we become the lion as the solitary individual to find the oasis on our own -- and here now the idea that "God has no grand children" comes to mind and so we will be on our own. In any event, that is how I see it to be for us (and then I sometimes wonder what the evangelical wing is all about, as in "I am a credit to his name?" (the f#cking idiot I say, while he is actually fornicating people to that great commission in their own life, and that is what burning churches in China is all about)).

Sorry, I am not violent, but just wonder why China/Russia and USA/the West are so very different in this respect.
Lambert, how can you "know" this stuff, if not for (the reality of) experiences?

Without experiences, NOTHING exists!
I read poetry and let my angles do the work for me. Metaphysics is like math and is no more that.
Metathought
Posts: 54
Joined: August 4th, 2013, 1:14 pm

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Metathought »

What is reality? Is it strictly the world based on sense-experience as perceived through the medium of the physical senses? How justified is this claim? Socially-accepted concepts of sense-experience reality arise when there is common agreement by society on the interpretation of sense-experience phenomena. Such interpretations may result in the postulation of the so-called scientific laws of nature. Yet, these interpretations are just "interpretations". One never knows when some brilliant person will come along and show that some aspect of our present socially-accepted interpretation of sense-experience phenomena is no longer valid and propose some other interpretation in its place. This indeed is the history of science in which several scientific laws and theories have undergone modification and even rejection in some cases. When can we ever say that we know things as they are? Or perhaps more important, can we really know that we know things as they are? What really is the criterion for reality?
User avatar
Uriahharris
Posts: 147
Joined: July 18th, 2014, 12:24 am

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Uriahharris »

This question has been answered by Descartes... Solved by Kant post existentialists and rationalists...
-UriahHarris
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Consul »

Granth wrote:Reality is an illusion...
That makes no sense, since the concept of illusion is based on a distinction between appearance and reality. An illusion is a false appearance of reality. If this distinction collapses, appearance becomes reality; and if there's no (possible) difference between seeming and being, there aren't any illusions, since these presuppose a difference between seeming and being by definition.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
Granth
Posts: 2084
Joined: July 20th, 2012, 11:56 pm

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Granth »

Consul wrote:
Granth wrote:Reality is an illusion...
That makes no sense, since the concept of illusion is based on a distinction between appearance and reality. An illusion is a false appearance of reality. If this distinction collapses, appearance becomes reality; and if there's no (possible) difference between seeming and being, there aren't any illusions, since these presuppose a difference between seeming and being by definition.
Describe being.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Consul »

Granth wrote:Describe being.
Your point being?
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
Granth
Posts: 2084
Joined: July 20th, 2012, 11:56 pm

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Granth »

Consul wrote:
Granth wrote:Describe being.
Your point being?
You proposed a distinction between appearance and being. So what is being? is being something that does not appear? Distinct, therefore, from appearance?
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Consul »

Metathought wrote:What is reality?
Charles Peirce's definitions of "real"/"reality" : http://www.commens.org/dictionary/term/real

One of them: "Reality is that mode of being by virtue of which the real thing is as it is, irrespectively of what any mind or any definite collection of minds may represent it to be."

-- Updated March 7th, 2015, 6:37 pm to add the following --
Granth wrote:
You proposed a distinction between appearance and being. So what is being? is being something that does not appear? Distinct, therefore, from appearance?
I didn't propose that distinction, I just mentioned it, saying that the concept "illusion" is based on it. In the case of a perceptual illusion, there is something real that appears to the perceiver, but it doesn't appear to him as it really is. (In the case of a hallucination, there seems to be something real that doesn't really exist.)
To say that appearance can be different from reality is not to say that reality never appears as it is or never appears at all.
Nicholas Rescher explains the situation, and I agree with him:

"[W]e have to do with reality when something presents itself as it actually and authentically is, be it a real truth or a real fact. In consequence, the fundamental distinction is not between the appearances available in our experience and that which is inaccessibly external to it, but rather between that which is correct within our experience and that which is somehow incorrect or misleading. lt would thus be wrongheaded to think of reality as a distinct sort of being different from 'the phenomenal realm' of what people take to be so. The crux is not the contrast between what is and what is thought to be, but rather between what is thought correctly and what is thought incorrectly and imperfectly.
In this context of consideration, reality just exactly is, and is nothing but, the condition of things that people purport when they avoid making mistakes and achieve the adaequatio ad rem that the medievals saw as the hallmark of truth. Properly conceived, reality is by its very nature accessible to inquiry, albeit to an inquiry which in practice will often get matters wrong. Reality, that is to say, is not something inherently extra-experiential: a mysterious something outside our cognitive reach. Instead, it encompasses that sector of experience which involves the true facts of the matter. After all, there is no reason why things cannot be what they appear in various respects, and in these respects appear as they actually are. Save in the world of the paranoid, things can be as they appear to be.
But of course they need not be so. As the proverb says, appearances can be deceiving. Our clock loses five minutes a day. Nevertheless on two occasions of the day it will be right on time. But if this circumstance somehow blinds us to this clock's flaws, we will be much deceived.
In distinguishing reality from mere appearance, what is fundamentally at issue is thus not an ontological distinction of different realms of being or thing-kinds, but an epistemological distinction between a correct and an incorrect view of things. Properly understood, the operative contrast is thus not that between reality and the phenomenon but between reality (veridical and authentic phenomena included) and what is misleading or incorrect. For reality can make its appearance in different guises—sometimes correctly and sometimes not. Appearance is not something different in kind and nature from reality, it is how reality presents itself. And reality is not by nature something different from appearance: it sometimes—and one would hope often—actually is what it appears to be."

(pp. 5-6)

"Regrettably, the contrast between appearance and reality is often identified—and thereby confused—with that between reality on the one side and mistaken or misleading appearance on the other. And this conflation will, effectively by definition, erect a Chinese Wall between reality and appearance. And this, rather paranoid, view of the matter must be put aside from the outset. To reemphasize: the philosophically significant contrast is not that between the real and the apparent as such, but rather that between the real and the merely apparent."
(p. 12)

"'Appearance' as philosophers use the term encompasses not just how things manifest themselves in sensory observation but the much broader range of how we take matters to stand—how we accept them to be not just in sense-observation but in conceptual thought as well. On this basis it would be gravely fallacious to take the step—as is often done—to map the real/unreal distinction and the real/apparent distinction. For this mixes the sheep and the goats in heaping vertical appearance together with mere (i.e., non-vertical) appearance, thereby subscribing to the paranoid delusion that things are never what they seem to be.
Reality is not a distinct realm of being standing apart and separate from the manifold of what we know in the realm of appearance. Those 'appearances' will—insofar as correct—be appearances of reality that represent features thereof. And, accordingly, the contrast between Reality and Appearance is not one carried out in the ontological order of different sorts of things. The realm of appearance is homogeneous with that of reality insofar as those appearances are correct.
The fact of it is that things sometimes—perhaps even frequently—are substantially as they appear to be. Reality and its appearance just are not two separate realms: there is nothing to prevent matters actually being as they are perceived and/or thought to be.
Appearance can in principle be something self-contained and self-sufficient: when appearing there is there need not be something that appears. When it appears to one that there is a pink elephant in your corner there need not be a something in that corner which appears as an elephant to me. Appearances may not only be deceiving, they may also be illusionary. In the sphere of appearance things can go seriously awry. And yet while matters can go wrong here, they need not do so. Things can indeed be as they appear. Total paranoia is clearly unwarranted. There is no reason that is, why appearance and reality cannot agree in this or that detail."

(pp. 14-5)

(Rescher, Nicholas. Reality and Its Appearance. New York: Continuum, 2010.)
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
Granth
Posts: 2084
Joined: July 20th, 2012, 11:56 pm

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Granth »

Consul wrote:
Metathought wrote:What is reality?
Charles Peirce's definitions of "real"/"reality" : http://www.commens.org/dictionary/term/real

One of them: "Reality is that mode of being by virtue of which the real thing is as it is, irrespectively of what any mind or any definite collection of minds may represent it to be."
So "being" is not real unless "mode" is involved? And I make no sense?

-- Updated March 8th, 2015, 12:46 pm to add the following --
Consul wrote:
Metathought wrote:What is reality?
Charles Peirce's definitions of "real"/"reality" : http://www.commens.org/dictionary/term/real

One of them: "Reality is that mode of being by virtue of which the real thing is as it is, irrespectively of what any mind or any definite collection of minds may represent it to be."

-- Updated March 7th, 2015, 6:37 pm to add the following --
Granth wrote:
You proposed a distinction between appearance and being. So what is being? is being something that does not appear? Distinct, therefore, from appearance?
I didn't propose that distinction, I just mentioned it, saying that the concept "illusion" is based on it. In the case of a perceptual illusion, there is something real that appears to the perceiver, but it doesn't appear to him as it really is. (In the case of a hallucination, there seems to be something real that doesn't really exist.)
To say that appearance can be different from reality is not to say that reality never appears as it is or never appears at all.
Nicholas Rescher explains the situation, and I agree with him:
So you never propose things? You merely mention them? Which of you is the real you and which is the illusory you? Are you somehow distinct from the mentioner?

-- Updated March 8th, 2015, 1:04 pm to add the following --

What I notice about writers of anything including philosophy and science is that if they are "good" then they are also assumed to be speaking of something true. However "good" seems to be based on the rhythm of their writing. A rhythm is a pattern of particular desirability and the mind loves, is attracted to, patterns. Patterns, to the mind, brings order to chaos. However, it could be just as true or real that chaos may trump order as Reality. I don't think mind will ever know which is real, chaos or order, and therefore will only "know" what is most attractive to it......and then call it reality. It is ultimately self-serving (reinforces the self, or the concept thereof).

-- Updated March 8th, 2015, 1:16 pm to add the following --

And science itself is a producer of more appearances. Consider mode. "The mode is the value that appears most often in a set of data." Scientific data produced, via experiment and equation, are appearances. Often new appearances. If appearances are reality then everything or nothing is reality. Also, "hallucinations" appear (to mind). Is mind real? I think it just produces, or reproduces (presents and represents) things. Things which are effectively patterns and rhythms. Stuff mind likes.
Lambert
Posts: 1061
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 11:55 am

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Lambert »

Granth wrote:
Consul wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


That makes no sense, since the concept of illusion is based on a distinction between appearance and reality. An illusion is a false appearance of reality. If this distinction collapses, appearance becomes reality; and if there's no (possible) difference between seeming and being, there aren't any illusions, since these presuppose a difference between seeming and being by definition.
Describe being.
Being is outside the Cave. Consul is right, but if we have to read modern philosophers who get lost in their own words it is easy for us to get lost in them too, or there would be agreement among philosophers right from the start. The fact is that they do not know. Plato's Cave is a much easier way to explain this. And then you can disagree all you want.

Plato held that oblivion exists inside the Cave where people must think. This so means that the Cave makes reference to our conscious mind as the only place that we can think and therefore we must think. Oblivion is the same as what we call fallen nature as opposed to heaven as two different states of mind. The Greeks identified a "Being in being" and that means there is 2 of us in each. One is the Being and the other is persona that we call human as an add-on to the man. There so is no such a thing as human race because human does not exist, he only thinks he does and therefore he must think to be = cogito ergo sum is the Cave-man who only thinks he is.

The ancients were the wise sheep herders that locked us up inside the Cave, and we beat our chest in it and proclaim that we are in charge of destiny inside the Cave where the competition is fierce these days with all those PhD's we have to show each other what we know, and we do, but only insofar as we exist inside the Cave.
Granth
Posts: 2084
Joined: July 20th, 2012, 11:56 pm

Re: Does reality really exist?

Post by Granth »

Lambert wrote:
Granth wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


Describe being.
Being is outside the Cave. Consul is right, but if we have to read modern philosophers who get lost in their own words it is easy for us to get lost in them too, or there would be agreement among philosophers right from the start. The fact is that they do not know. Plato's Cave is a much easier way to explain this. And then you can disagree all you want.

Plato held that oblivion exists inside the Cave where people must think. This so means that the Cave makes reference to our conscious mind as the only place that we can think and therefore we must think. Oblivion is the same as what we call fallen nature as opposed to heaven as two different states of mind. The Greeks identified a "Being in being" and that means there is 2 of us in each. One is the Being and the other is persona that we call human as an add-on to the man. There so is no such a thing as human race because human does not exist, he only thinks he does and therefore he must think to be = cogito ergo sum is the Cave-man who only thinks he is.

The ancients were the wise sheep herders that locked us up inside the Cave, and we beat our chest in it and proclaim that we are in charge of destiny inside the Cave where the competition is fierce these days with all those PhD's we have to show each other what we know, and we do, but only insofar as we exist inside the Cave.
You have not explained how Consul is right. If you are therefore to assume Consul's position, given your apparent agreement with her or him, then you may as well explain how his or her specific statement is right and address my response to Consul's statement directly. Consul, by the way, did not mention Plato or his cave.
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021