Being before the Big Bang

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
Ace9
Posts: 20
Joined: January 7th, 2017, 5:51 pm

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Ace9 »

r6 ....In the context of Cosmology, the use of the word infinity is in common use by practitioners in the field that I have read

The word eternity seems to be a more colloquial term, at least from the dictionary definition
User avatar
Cuthbert
New Trial Member
Posts: 15
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 5:09 am

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Cuthbert »

Chasw wrote:
Felix wrote: (Nested quote removed.)
I think Aristotle said that metaphysics arose from the question to ti en eivai - 'what it is for something to be that thing' or 'what it is for anything to exist' or 'what existence consist in'. For Parmenides existence was the only game in town and everything else was just so much chin music. But I think the distinction between predicative and existential 'to be' would have been useful earlier than it was.

plato dot stanford dot edu-> entries -> aristotle-metaphysics
User avatar
Atreyu
Posts: 1737
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 3:11 am
Favorite Philosopher: P.D. Ouspensky
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Atreyu »

Chasw wrote:Astrophyscist have in recent years begun to propose that the inception of the universe was a spontaneous event. Thereby, being came into existence, replacing nothingness. No Creator involved. My description of their position may be imperfect, but its close enough.

Savvy modern religionists, on the other hand, thank the physicists for their research and accept the idea of a big bang, but still see the hand of an agent, probably a sentient being, in causing the primary event and arranging for the results to be stable and eventually conducive to life.

From a metaphysical POV, both accounts imply or require a prior state of Being, before the big bang. If the inception of the universe was spontaneous, then it must have occurred when conditions were just right in a prior universe, perhaps the same universe, but at an earlier stage. Evidence for this possibility is the recent scientific confirmation of the Higgs Field, a kind of aether which exists everywhere, even where the initial photon-waves from the bang first propagated outward long ago. A wave can only propagate through an existing field.

What do you think existed before the big bang? Was Being the same then as now, or radically different? Did nothingness prevail before the bang? I suggest it helps if we maintain a rather fluid conception of time itself. Stephen Hawking once wrote that, with the advent of modern physics, "Philosophy is dead". The fact that astrophysicists are still stymied by this before-the-bang question, neatly refutes Dr Hawking's claim. Thx - CW
'The Nothing', or 'The Void', was what 'existed' before the Big Bang, if you want to use the word 'existence', although this term is dubious in relation to such an idea.

The idea here is that the Universe is a Conscious Entity, which is born, lives, and then dies, only to repeat the process eternally. You could also view it as waking up, and then falling asleep again, over and over, just as we do. And all of the matter/substance/form of the Universe is the thought of such an entity, i.e. the Primordial Being creates reality via thought, since there are no competing entities to question Its 'reality'. This means that whatever this Entity visualized/thought/imagined became Reality. And when this Entity 'falls asleep' or 'dies', naturally Everything disappears along with it, since Everything only existed in the first place because It 'said so'.

So basically the Universe existed before the Big Bang, only in such a form that there was no Awareness anywhere, and no projections of any Awareness (like matter, energy, space, time, etc). 'Before' the Big Bang the Universe was asleep, or dead (although 'before' is not really accurate because Time does not apply here). Some ancient systems called this 'The Void', or 'The Nothing'....
Wayne92587
Posts: 1780
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Wayne92587 »

Superior, Chasw and Atreyu.
Now all that are needed are the details.
Details to Follow.

Hermes Trismegistus, Lord of Ring, Keeper of the Holy Grail.
Ya, Amen Ra; Make it so!---->0
Simply Wee
Posts: 428
Joined: August 27th, 2012, 2:11 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Simply Wee »

'Come together...right now!....over me.' I guess
You had to be there to believe it...or here, just not everywhere...time has that. I guess. What gets me is when people try to apply logic, education, or Wiki to answer such a question and end up having a conversation about something other. Its a stone you just can't lift, so you have to expand it, it might as well be infinite, and that way you won't need to get around it or out of it, and in another way you might actually eventually, get over it.
"Men are not disturbed by things, but the view they take of things".
Wayne92587
Posts: 1780
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Wayne92587 »

According to God's, Universal, Math, that is Math born of the omniscience of an omnipresence Singularity having no relative, numerical value.

In order for a Singularity to have relative, a numerical value of One-1, said singularity must exist as the first in a series, as the beginning of a process such as the Evolutionary Process, must exist as the beginning of a continuum such as The Space-Time Continuum.

It is a given that a real whole number existing as a Singularity having no relative, numerical value, that the singularity of Zero-0 precedes a singularity of One-1 in God’s Universal Math.

It is a given that the first number in a series, a process, a continuum, is Zero-0, Nada, Zip, Zilch, Nothing.

Meaning that before the beginning moment of The Creation of the Physical Universe, the only thing in existence was the Omniscience of a State of Singularity filled with of an Omnipresent Singularity having no relative, numerical value, existing as the Transcendental (Metaphysical) Fully Random Quantum State of Singularity.

Singularity exists as an omnipresent, as an immeasurable, as an Infinitely Finite Indivisible Singularity within the Omniscience of a State of Singularity, within the Transcendental (Metaphysical) Fully Random Quantum State of Singularity.
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Rr6 »

Our finite, occupied space Universe, exists eternally as dynamic set of three primary aspects:

1} Space ( ) i.e. positive shaped gravitational space,

2} time ergo frequency of sine-wave topology ^v ^v or as \/\/\,

3} Space )( i.e. negative shaped dark energy space.

Relatively simple set to grasp. imho a cosmically primary three-ness.

Before the big bang is just more of the same mentioned above.

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Consul »

Ace9 wrote:r6 ....In the context of Cosmology, the use of the word infinity is in common use by practitioners in the field that I have read

The word eternity seems to be a more colloquial term, at least from the dictionary definition
A relevant distinction:

"The English word ‘eternal’ comes from aeturnus in Latin, itself a derivation from aevum, an age or time. So ‘eternity’ means everlastingness. However, in the course of philosophical discussion the idea of everlastingness has been further refined, and two contrasting concepts can be denoted by it. It is usual to make the contrast clear by calling one of these ‘eternity’ or ‘atemporality’ and the other ‘sempiternity’ or ‘everlastingness'."

Eternity: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/eternity/

Also note that sempiternity doesn't entail (temporal) infinity. For to say that the spacetime world has always existed doesn't mean that it is infinitely old. No matter whether or not its temporal dimension is finite, spacetime has always existed and will always exist, because there wasn't and couldn't have been any time in the past when spacetime didn't exist, and there won't and couldn't be any time in the future when spacetime doesn't exist. That is, the notion of a pre- or post-spacetime time is self-contradictory.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
User avatar
Bohm2
Posts: 1129
Joined: February 23rd, 2013, 6:05 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell
Location: Canada

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Bohm2 »

Consul wrote:For to say that the spacetime world has always existed doesn't mean that it is infinitely old. No matter whether or not its temporal dimension is finite, spacetime has always existed and will always exist, because there wasn't and couldn't have been any time in the past when spacetime didn't exist, and there won't and couldn't be any time in the future when spacetime doesn't exist. That is, the notion of a pre- or post-spacetime time is self-contradictory.
Why should any physicist accept such an a priori ontological doctrine? The scope of the real should be delimited by the notions provided by ‘fundamental physics’, and if the physicist proposes that spacetime does not exist at the most fundamental level or that that it is an “emergent” concept, in order to explain some phenomena, then, so be it. The physicist does not care and shouldn't care about some obscure a priori criterion of what exists or doesn't exist, made by some philosopher:
Science is a bootstrapping operation which is not substantively constrained by a prioristic forms of speculative or analytic philosophy and which can in principle help itself to anything that can meet the test of scientific rationality.
Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Eduk »

I agree Bohm2 if you want to engage philosophically with concepts of space and time then you are going to need to engage with modern physics. Which is a pretty daunting task, but there you are.
Unknown means unknown.
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Rr6 »

Infinity is to space, as,
eternity is to time.

Physical/energy cannot be created nor destroyed and at best--- or worst case scenario ---observed physical/energy is created from Space ( ) - Space )(.

IN this scenario it is Gravity and Dark Energy that eternally exists and our observed Time ^v as physical/energy reality comes and goes from Gravity and Dark Energy

However, as some heat death of Universe's scenarios have made clear, and I have made clear with texticonic visuals of a heat death of Universe scenario. observed Time ^v i.e. observed physical/energy/reality, becomes one, very large, very low amplitude--- think nearly straight line ---, and very long frequency photon.

The simplest, and mininimalist version of 'heat death of Universe' Ive offerered is as follows, however, the one change Ive made over the years is to understand that 2D great circles are now 3D great tori;

O|O = the already known to exist left and right skew set of at least 31 great circles/tori { OO } and longest wave photon |

Instead of tangent great sets of 31 we see the two sets overlapping with the overlap being where the longest wave photon occurs;

( ( | ) )

A variation of the above, is that same sceanario except there exists a multitude of great circle/tori bilateral sets on each side of the longest possible yet finite wave photon;

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

-------------------------------------------------------------
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

In the latter version we can the overlapping scenario also, just to hard for me to create.

123, ABC thats how easy Universe can be. Sung to M. Jackson tune.

r6




Rr6 wrote:Our finite, occupied space Universe, exists eternally as dynamic set of three primary aspects:
1} Space ( ) i.e. positive shaped gravitational space,
2} time ergo frequency of sine-wave topology ^v ^v or as \/\/\,
3} Space )( i.e. negative shaped dark energy space.
Relatively simple set to grasp. imho a cosmically primary three-ness.
Before the big bang is just more of the same mentioned above.

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Consul »

Bohm2 wrote:
Consul wrote:For to say that the spacetime world has always existed doesn't mean that it is infinitely old. No matter whether or not its temporal dimension is finite, spacetime has always existed and will always exist, because there wasn't and couldn't have been any time in the past when spacetime didn't exist, and there won't and couldn't be any time in the future when spacetime doesn't exist. That is, the notion of a pre- or post-spacetime time is self-contradictory.
Why should any physicist accept such an a priori ontological doctrine? The scope of the real should be delimited by the notions provided by ‘fundamental physics’, and if the physicist proposes that spacetime does not exist at the most fundamental level or that that it is an “emergent” concept, in order to explain some phenomena, then, so be it. The physicist does not care and shouldn't care about some obscure a priori criterion of what exists or doesn't exist, made by some philosopher:
Science is a bootstrapping operation which is not substantively constrained by a prioristic forms of speculative or analytic philosophy and which can in principle help itself to anything that can meet the test of scientific rationality.
It's surely not rational to believe in things falling under incoherent concepts; and the concept of a time beyond or outside, before or after, earlier than or later than the temporal dimension of spacetime is self-evidently incoherent, since all times are part of spacetime. As soon as you speak of a spacetime-transcendent temporal dimension you have contradicted yourself. Note that by "spacetime" I mean spacetime as a whole, all of it, and not just some part or the observable part of it. So if the Big Bang is the absolute beginning of time (and space), then there is no before, since there cannot possibly be some time t* < t = 0.

"x has always existed" means "there is no time t when x doesn't exist", and it is an a priori knowable conceptual truth that there can be neither a past time nor a future time when spacetime doesn't exist. This is true even if its temporal dimension is finite toward the past and/or the future.

Moreover, "what is non-fundamental is not therefore non-existent" (David Armstrong). That is, what I say above is true independently of whether or not spacetime is an "emergent" entity. It is also true independently of whether it is a substance or a structure.
Anyway, a non-spatiotemporal world, i.e. one to which the concepts of space/spatiality/extension and time/temporality/duration are inapplicable, is not a physical world.

"The universe did not come into existence, nor will it cease to exist. And this is not just a matter of empirical fact: there is nothing we could intelligibly describe as the universe's coming into existence or its ceasing to exist. Beginnings and endings join causation in being concepts which, while having innumerable instances within our world, resist extrapolation to the universe itself.
So, if the universe cannot have come into existence and cannot cease to exist, is it temporally infinite in both directions?

[W]hile the notion of beginning to exist is suspect in application to the universe as a whole, we have an allowable approximation to this notion in terms of the universe's having been in existence for only a finite time. This is not: there was a time at which the universe did not exist; the universe will have existed at all times. Nor will there be a future time when it does not exist. But, for all that, there could be a finite limit to its duration to date as well as to its future history.

Similar caveats apply when speaking of an initial event, as the Big Bang may be thought to provide. Consider the kinds of physical process required to make sense of temporal notions, and in particular that of an instant. An instant, a point of time, can be annexed to the end-point of a change, as with starting or ceasing to move. However, if there is no preceding state of rest, there is no starting to move, so no possibility of marking a point of time by reference to such a happening. With respect to an initial physical happening, we cannot invoke the model of an event to which an instant of time might be assigned which is in any sense a temporal boundary, a point of division between the start of the event and an eventless period which preceded. We must always remain temporally within the universe, never somehow break the barrier and find ourselves on the other side, but if there were an initial instant there would be another side—just as, for a body to have a surface requires there to be a contiguous space. None of this is to deny anything involved in a Big Bang cosmology. It is just that any talk about the universe as coming into existence is to be replaced by talk of its finite duration—a matter of a more apposite redescription. Big Bang or no Big Bang, there has never been a time when there was nothing, and our conception of the Big Bang has to be accommodated to that consideration.

The notion of a finite duration has been offered as an approximation to that of a beginning of existence for the universe, but someone who wished to speak of the universe as having begun to exist might reasonably protest that they had not meant anything more than what is captured by the former: to say that the universe came into existence so many years ago is simply to say that it is so many years old. There need be no implication that some event took place at a first moment of time. What is important is that we should avoid conceptions of a temporal boundary that carry over conditions applicable only to happenings within the universe; likewise with the notion of the universe as ceasing to exist. It is not as if, were this to happen, there would then be nothing there. States, more generally, may be handled in this way. If a body has at no time been stationary, then it will have been in motion at every moment of its existence, in which case we cannot say that it began to move, but we could still, it would seem, speak of it as having been in motion for only a finite time. What is important is that a beginning, whether of change or of existence, rather than a merely finite duration, appears to be needed if we are to have an event, a happening in time, which raises a question of causation."


(Rundle, Bede. Why There is Something rather than Nothing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. pp. 122-4)
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Rr6 »

There exists macro-micro infinite, non-occupied space, that, embraces the finite occupied space. Simple concept/scenario.

This is so simple yet so few appear to grasp the simple, acknowledge the simple much less accept such a simple concepts/scenario. Why?

Mostly it has to do with ego blocking their ability to do so. :--(

Those who want to investigate the true nature of "U"niverse and Universe{ occupied space } need to begin with the above.

To exclude the above is excluding the greatest whole set. imho. For some the truth sets them free while for other it traps them in endless false projections, misunderstandings if not worse.

r6
Rr6---Infinity is to space, as,
eternity is to time.
Physical/energy cannot be created nor destroyed and at best--- or worst case scenario ---observed physical/energy is created from Space ( ) - Space )(.
IN this scenario it is Gravity and Dark Energy that eternally exists and our observed Time ^v as physical/energy reality comes and goes from Gravity and Dark Energy
However, as some heat death of Universe's scenarios have made clear, and I have made clear with texticonic visuals of a heat death of Universe scenario. observed Time ^v i.e. observed physical/energy/reality, becomes one, very large, very low amplitude--- think nearly straight line ---, and very long frequency photon.
The simplest, and mininimalist version of 'heat death of Universe' Ive offerered is as follows, however, the one change Ive made over the years is to understand that 2D great circles are now 3D great tori;
O|O = the already known to exist left and right skew set of at least 31 great circles/tori { OO } and longest wave photon |
Instead of tangent great sets of 31 we see the two sets overlapping with the overlap being where the longest wave photon occurs;
( ( | ) )
A variation of the above, is that same sceanario except there exists a multitude of great circle/tori bilateral sets on each side of the longest possible yet finite wave photon;

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

-------------------------------------------------------------
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
In the latter version we can the overlapping scenario also, just to hard for me to create.
123, ABC thats how easy Universe can be. Sung to M. Jackson tune.
Our finite, occupied space Universe, exists eternally as dynamic set of three primary aspects:
1} Space ( ) i.e. positive shaped gravitational space,
2} time ergo frequency of sine-wave topology ^v ^v or as \/\/\,
3} Space )( i.e. negative shaped dark energy space.
Relatively simple set to grasp. imho a cosmically primary three-ness.
Before the big bang is just more of the same mentioned above.

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
Wayne92587
Posts: 1780
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Wayne92587 »

Space-Time has not always existed; Time and Space did not become relative until the beginning moment of the Creation of the Reality of First Cause, the First Singularity to have relative, numerical, value, which was itself Uncaused. The Reality of First Cause not being born of Cause and Effect, was an Affect, a Creation, was not born of ordinary natural means.

Imagine if you will, an untold number, quantity, of omnipresent, Infinitely Finite Indivisible Singularities having no relative, numerical value of One-1, existing within as an Omniscient Field of Singularities, as an Omniscient Transcendental (Metaphysical) Fully Random Quantum State of Singularity, as a State in which Nothing was relative, had Numerical Value, a
State in which Motion was Meaningless, existed without displacement, without angular momentum, nothing having velocity of speed and direction, the existence or nonexistence of the Whole of existence, Time, Space and motion being Uncertain.

This State, condition, existing at the Zero Hour, in the Beginning, the Moment before the spontaneous Creation of the Reality of First Cause, the First Singularity to have relative, a numerical value of One-1.

A Fully Random Infinitely Finite Indivisible Singularity having no relative numerical value, having a numerical value of Zero-0 became dislodged, displaced, spontaneously attaining, angular momentum, velocity of speed and direct, becoming the First Singularity to have a relative,numerical value of One-1.

The Reality of First Cause, the first singularity to have a relative, numerical vale of One-1 becoming the First in a Series, the beginning of a continuum such as Space-Time, the beginning of a process, such as the Evolutionary Process.

In the Beginning, this State or Condition, existing as the either, as a Substance that had no Mass, as pure unadulterated Energy, OHM.

As a Random Singularity of Zero-0 became dislodged, the Reality of First Cause, the first Singularity
to have relative a numerical value of One-1 became the Single direct cause of a system of chaos (as in the Butterfly Effect) that made manifest the Heavens and the Earth, the Universe, the Reality of Everything that exists in the Material, Physical sense of the Word.
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: Being before the Big Bang

Post by Rr6 »

Space ( ) - Time^v - Space )( exists eternally and there is not any rational, logical common sense basis or much less as shred of evidence for any other conclusion.

Sticking to facts and rational, logical common sense is so much better for any philosophy forum that is searching for true nature of Universe/Nature/God. imho

r6
Rr6 wrote:There exists macro-micro infinite, non-occupied space, that, embraces the finite occupied space. Simple concept/scenario.
This is so simple yet so few appear to grasp the simple, acknowledge the simple much less accept such a simple concepts/scenario. Why?
Mostly it has to do with ego blocking their ability to do so. :--(
Those who want to investigate the true nature of "U"niverse and Universe{ occupied space } need to begin with the above.
To exclude the above is excluding the greatest whole set. imho. For some the truth sets them free while for other it traps them in endless false projections, misunderstandings if not worse.
r6
Rr6---Infinity is to space, as,
eternity is to time.
Physical/energy cannot be created nor destroyed and at best--- or worst case scenario ---observed physical/energy is created from Space ( ) - Space )(.
IN this scenario it is Gravity and Dark Energy that eternally exists and our observed Time ^v as physical/energy reality comes and goes from Gravity and Dark Energy
However, as some heat death of Universe's scenarios have made clear, and I have made clear with texticonic visuals of a heat death of Universe scenario. observed Time ^v i.e. observed physical/energy/reality, becomes one, very large, very low amplitude--- think nearly straight line ---, and very long frequency photon.
The simplest, and mininimalist version of 'heat death of Universe' Ive offerered is as follows, however, the one change Ive made over the years is to understand that 2D great circles are now 3D great tori;
O|O = the already known to exist left and right skew set of at least 31 great circles/tori { OO } and longest wave photon |
Instead of tangent great sets of 31 we see the two sets overlapping with the overlap being where the longest wave photon occurs;
( ( | ) )
A variation of the above, is that same sceanario except there exists a multitude of great circle/tori bilateral sets on each side of the longest possible yet finite wave photon;

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

-------------------------------------------------------------
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
In the latter version we can the overlapping scenario also, just to hard for me to create.
123, ABC thats how easy Universe can be. Sung to M. Jackson tune.
Our finite, occupied space Universe, exists eternally as dynamic set of three primary aspects:
1} Space ( ) i.e. positive shaped gravitational space,
2} time ergo frequency of sine-wave topology ^v ^v or as \/\/\,
3} Space )( i.e. negative shaped dark energy space.
Relatively simple set to grasp. imho a cosmically primary three-ness.
Before the big bang is just more of the same mentioned above.

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
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