Examining time's effect on determinism

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
User avatar
Papus79
Posts: 1798
Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm

Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Papus79 »

I've brought up in a few threads a particular notion that I've had for the last eight or nine years. While it doesn't bother me to have this outlook I do realize it's bold, a lot of people generally don't make this claim, so I want to put it to the test and see if my conceptualization of time fits within the milieu of what we scientifically know about it.

The sense I get is that action, really movement at all whether of physical objects or thought (whether that's many neurotransmitters, something more, or something other), rely on time as their backdrop and carrier of motion.

The consequence of that for me - any individual moment, call it a plank second for a stable basis, seems like it should be completely stable. If you could flip through a range of plank seconds, say ten, forward and backward like you were shuffling a deck of cards, each of those plank seconds should either be a) exactly the same or b) different only at the background radiation level but the same at the macro level, really the relevant range where we live. That strongly suggests to me absolute determinism, in that to replay five seconds a minute, or an hour of your life over repeatedly would be the only absolutely or near absolutely perfect reiteration you could have of any motion because the causes, assuming we're starting from the same universe at the start, will have identical causes, potentials, and environmental states at least at the macro level.

The area where I have to admit some ignorance; I've often heard on physics shows arguments made that if you're moving toward a place millions of lightyears away that place is, right then and there, simultaneusly, hundreds of years in the future and if you turn your back and move away from it that same place is hundreds of years in the past. I really haven't digested the implications of that aside from either that it's a flaw in a theory that has yet to be cooked out or that its an effect that would be somehow completely subjective only to that individual somehow (which would suggest some remarkable things about consciousness and the depth and breadth of individual universes). I still don't see where that would effect my conception of time and motion because no matter how far in the future or in the past different places are getting sent you're still an agent of causes beyond yourself and they'd be happening happening exactly that way based on the causes that flow through you.

I don't mean to get into conversation about free will here because I've been in so many conversations across the internet where people maintained that determinism and free will had nothing to do with each other (I tend to think the use of words in that case is a bit skewed but that's my own opinion).

What I'm really interested in is seeing if anyone here has a conception of time, within the scientific lit, that challenges this or even just given sets of facts from the scientific lit that blow this out of the water. if I'm wrong on this I'd like to learn something imminently useful about the fundamentals that I perhaps may not possess at the moment.

Thank you!
Solatic
Posts: 23
Joined: November 14th, 2016, 5:16 pm

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Solatic »

To be honest, my perspective of time is sort of a religious one. Imagine time as an entity, and the keeper of that entity as the archangel Gabriel. But that's just my natural thought. Anyways, on toward the discussion!

I want to start by saying I'm not going to not acknowledge determinism and free-will's relations with each other. As quantum mechanics has proven that free-will does exist. But I also believe that determinism and free-will work hand in hand. Why? Because determinism works through concentrated behaviorism, which then makes it absolute. While free-will deals with the cognitive, which when concentrated, makes it absolute. And both are very existent. It's a choice of life, of what you want to work with. Where you are from, and where you want to go.

With that said, my perspective on time, is that all gradations of matter. Whether it be aether, or energy, makes up what we may call existence itself. Now the existential usage of the idea of time, just imagine as though existence had a consciousness. And time is existence infinitely reflecting itself.
User avatar
Papus79
Posts: 1798
Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Papus79 »

The one thing I'll say about free-will and it's about all I really want to - it seems like people really mean it in terms of un-coerced agency, ie. that you were able to practice all of your available options to the best of your ability and chose the one that suited you best rather than being under such a heavy tax from external stressors that you're forced to act immediately or according to another agent's will and possibly without any respect to your own best interest. That definition of free will leaves it highly variable as your free-will, lets say, would be considered much higher when planning which of twenty possible places in town you might want to go out to lunch at and five minutes later your free-will could contract to almost nothing if you're at a red light with cars on either side of you and have someone behind you coming in at 50 mph with no sign of stopping.
User avatar
-1-
Posts: 878
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by -1- »

Papus79 wrote: What I'm really interested in is seeing if anyone here has a conception of time, within the scientific lit, that challenges this or even just given sets of facts from the scientific lit that blow this out of the water. if I'm wrong on this I'd like to learn something imminently useful about the fundamentals that I perhaps may not possess at the moment.

Thank you!
What do you refer to by "this"? You use it in every sentence of your last paragraph, yet it is unclear to me whether you refer to your own proposition or to the theory of relativity or to the discrepancy between the two. "This" points to an unknown antecedent.

-- Updated 2017 March 10th, 6:28 am to add the following --
Solatic wrote:To be honest, my perspective of time is sort of a religious one. Imagine time as an entity, and the keeper of that entity as the archangel Gabriel. But that's just my natural thought. Anyways, on toward the discussion!

I want to start by saying I'm not going to not acknowledge determinism and free-will's relations with each other. As quantum mechanics has proven that free-will does exist. But I also believe that determinism and free-will work hand in hand. Why? Because determinism works through concentrated behaviorism, which then makes it absolute. While free-will deals with the cognitive, which when concentrated, makes it absolute. And both are very existent. It's a choice of life, of what you want to work with. Where you are from, and where you want to go.

With that said, my perspective on time, is that all gradations of matter. Whether it be aether, or energy, makes up what we may call existence itself. Now the existential usage of the idea of time, just imagine as though existence had a consciousness. And time is existence infinitely reflecting itself.
I appreciate that logic and reality means nothing to you, a deeply religious person.

But according to Christianity, free will does not exist.

There is a proof to show that. This is how it goes:

God is infinitely smart, and knows everything. Therefore he knows the future. He knows exactly what you are going to do tomorrow, or the day after or next year or ten years from now. If you don't accept this, you are not a Christian or a religious person who accepts the Bible.

If it is known what you will do tomorrow, then the choices you make tomorrow will be predetermined. You will choose whether to wear the red sox or the blue sox, but God knows today that you will wear the blue sox tomorrow. So when you make your choice tomorrow, you can't BUT choose the blue sox, because God knows and it can't be altered.

Ergo, you don't have a choice, you don't have free will, it is only an illusion to you that you do.
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.
Solatic
Posts: 23
Joined: November 14th, 2016, 5:16 pm

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Solatic »

Well that's where I beg to differ, God is infinitely wise, but that doesn't mean he interferes with your life just because he knows you and what you are to do. He doesn't interfere at all, unless you beg Him then hopefully he does. In theological terms, free-will is a choice. God made the first angels, with free-will, otherwise they'd be zombies repeating the mantra, "I love you Father." What He did with the angels who didn't accept Him is a different story entirely.

-- Updated March 10th, 2017, 9:05 am to add the following --
Papus79 wrote:The one thing I'll say about free-will and it's about all I really want to - it seems like people really mean it in terms of un-coerced agency, ie. that you were able to practice all of your available options to the best of your ability and chose the one that suited you best rather than being under such a heavy tax from external stressors that you're forced to act immediately or according to another agent's will and possibly without any respect to your own best interest. That definition of free will leaves it highly variable as your free-will, lets say, would be considered much higher when planning which of twenty possible places in town you might want to go out to lunch at and five minutes later your free-will could contract to almost nothing if you're at a red light with cars on either side of you and have someone behind you coming in at 50 mph with no sign of stopping.
I respect that, but because it's minimal does not mean it does not exist at all.

Either way, perhaps, we should return to the subject of time?
User avatar
-1-
Posts: 878
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by -1- »

Dear Solatic, whether God interferes with person's lives is not an issue here. You made a mistake commonly made by those who try to criticise the logic.

The issue is that God KNOWS what you will do tomorrow. Not that He commands you or guides you (although that is possible too); but that he has pre-knowledge of everything, because he is omniscient. Not necessarily wise, or infinitely wise, but infinitely knowledgeable.

So go through the mental exercise again, I beg you. This is worth your while, because it will change your stance on free will for ever, amen.

God knows the future. If the future is known, it is impossible to change it. There is only one action each of us can take in matters of choices, and that action is known already. If it's known, then you may have an illusion of making a choice, but there is no such thing, because if you truly freely chose something, then it would be free of God's foreknowledge, which it is not.

Think about it... please.
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.
User avatar
Papus79
Posts: 1798
Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Papus79 »

Solatic wrote: I respect that, but because it's minimal does not mean it does not exist at all.
Well, I'm not even calling it minimal. I hope people's options are as maximal as possible, they have better lives that way.

What I would argue is that the whole thing is 100% deterministic. I know we're dealing in fuzzy terms when we get to free will or try to talk about free will vs determinism but it comes back to the basis that you don't craft your own personality from the bottom up, some combination of your biology and experiences crafts both your likes and dislikes, and you discover the rules of your own mind and biology as you mature which tends to draw the shape of the container of who you can be in the future. It's not that a person can't have radical changes of belief, just that there's really nothing about that which is spontaneous. The importance of acknowledging a subconscious mind is that other parts of you are thinking even when the construct that you'd identify as 'I' doesn't seem to be. Inputs are always getting digested that are too incomplete for you to have a full-on conscious thought about which is why you can have a night loaded with dreams or why you can experience what you'd swear is an epiphany or intuition about something complex or abstract going on around you that you couldn't quite put your finger on or pin down up until that point.

-- Updated March 10th, 2017, 6:13 pm to add the following --
-1- wrote:
Papus79 wrote: What I'm really interested in is seeing if anyone here has a conception of time, within the scientific lit, that challenges this or even just given sets of facts from the scientific lit that blow this out of the water. if I'm wrong on this I'd like to learn something imminently useful about the fundamentals that I perhaps may not possess at the moment.

Thank you!
What do you refer to by "this"? You use it in every sentence of your last paragraph, yet it is unclear to me whether you refer to your own proposition or to the theory of relativity or to the discrepancy between the two. "This" points to an unknown antecedent.
Actually I was talking about an obscure American rapper! I just forgot to capitalize or add the apostrophe in his name.
Humbly watching Youtube in Universe 25. - Me
Solatic
Posts: 23
Joined: November 14th, 2016, 5:16 pm

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Solatic »

-1- wrote:Dear Solatic, whether God interferes with person's lives is not an issue here. You made a mistake commonly made by those who try to criticise the logic.

The issue is that God KNOWS what you will do tomorrow. Not that He commands you or guides you (although that is possible too); but that he has pre-knowledge of everything, because he is omniscient. Not necessarily wise, or infinitely wise, but infinitely knowledgeable.

So go through the mental exercise again, I beg you. This is worth your while, because it will change your stance on free will for ever, amen.

God knows the future. If the future is known, it is impossible to change it. There is only one action each of us can take in matters of choices, and that action is known already. If it's known, then you may have an illusion of making a choice, but there is no such thing, because if you truly freely chose something, then it would be free of God's foreknowledge, which it is not.

Think about it... please.
The problem with the common train of belief, and my beliefs, is that many people claim God to be omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient. I disagree with these terms. I do believe He is infinitely wise, albeit though that is on the standard of His Morality that He hung as a law just as gravity. What is the opinion of God, toward time? I cannot remember where in the bible where He says, "I care not for time." It's not knowledge that He takes action through, it's wisdom. Wisdom which is to discern prophecy through the golden rule. Discern, which is to tell the difference. Prophecy, law and grace exacting the teachings of consequence. Golden rule, which says to love the Lord God with all that you have and to love your siblings of this world as yourself. Knowledge in itself is corrupt, because nothing learned without experience gains anything toward life. Wisdom teaches that life learned through experience gives us contentment through strife or peace. Hence how you have the tree of life, which is essentially knowing nothing without fear. While the more knowledge you know, the philosopher realizes, he knows nothing at all. Solomon himself bears witness, with much wisdom, is much grief and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow.

If time is knowledge, and the tree of knowledge corrupts as much as power itself corrupts. And time itself, God cares nothing about. Then how can he be all-knowing? Why would God be something He hates? As knowledge breeds pride, God Himself is not proud. He might be a jealous God, but He is not proud.

You know what the biggest lie of all of creation is? Is that death exists. What I am trying to allude to, is not the idea that free-will is the most significant thing to life. But rather to think that free-will is not the illusion, but physicality itself is. If time is existence being conscious and infinitely reflecting itself. Then every one of us, is God's dream. Google Mesmeric Revelation - Edgar Allan Poe, and you'll see what I am saying.
User avatar
-1-
Posts: 878
Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by -1- »

Papus79 wrote: Actually I was talking about an obscure American rapper! I just forgot to capitalize or add the apostrophe in his name.
Yah, I've heard of him... he is a super-wealthy Christmas caroler who deals in drugs and shoots people down in packed auditoriums. "I rap you this, I rap you that, I rap all your presents" is his opus magna.
This search engine is powered by Hunger, Thirst, and a desperate need to Mate.
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Rr6 »

Papus79---The sense I get is that action, really movement at all whether of physical objects or thought (whether that's many neurotransmitters, something more, or something other), rely on time as their backdrop and carrier of motion.
I agree, time = motion, ergo frequency as expressed very clearly with the common sine-wave topology ^v\/\/v^
The consequence of that for me - any individual moment, call it a plank second for a stable basis, seems like it should be completely stable.
"stable" = integrity, irrespective of how short lived. Ex mesons{ two quarks } are very short lived, but have stable integrity as a particle or unit set of particles for what ever length of time.

What I'm really interested in is seeing if anyone here has a conception of time, within the scientific lit, that challenges this or even just given sets of facts from the scientific lit that blow this out of the water. if I'm wrong on this I'd like to learn something imminently useful about the fundamentals that I perhaps may not possess at the moment.Thank you!
Temporal time is both experience and conceptual{ metaphysical-1 }.

Moment is a length of time, irrespective of how short and stems from motion and associated with mojo, motor, momma, money--- time is money ----move, etc.

A trajectory is never straight i.e. it is is always being pulled this way or that way by gravity.

A trajectory may reach a peak of almost being straight and will make a sharp angular change of direction to compensate for its approaching of true straightness.

Or it may make many ultra-micro, minor adjustments to compensate for never being purely straight trajectory.

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
Philo_soph
Posts: 68
Joined: January 4th, 2014, 2:52 am

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Philo_soph »

The ideas appear to be interesting although they should be subjected to analytic interpretation to see how they work in a hypothetically existing system. I will describe how “I” perceive the world you depict.

Papus79 wrote:
The sense I get is that action, really movement at all whether of physical objects or thought (whether that's many neurotransmitters, something more, or something other), rely on time as their backdrop and carrier of motion.
I totally believe that too.

Papus79 wrote:
If you could flip through a range of plank seconds, say ten, forward and backward like you were shuffling a deck of cards, each of those plank seconds should either be a) exactly the same or b) different only at the background radiation level but the same at the macro level, really the relevant range where we live. That strongly suggests to me absolute determinism, in that to replay five seconds a minute, or an hour of your life over repeatedly would be the only absolutely or near absolutely perfect reiteration you could have of any motion because the causes, assuming we're starting from the same universe at the start, will have identical causes, potentials, and environmental states at least at the macro level.
We need to have an objective view of this condition. Let’s assume we are talking about a system in which every element can only exist within a given coordinate composed of three variables: x, y, z. In any given moment, any entity must contain a particular value for each of these valuables. That’s the way I interpret “exactly the same” or “different only at the background radiation level.”

So, entity 1 (x1, y1, z1) is in an identical position as is entity 2 (x1, y1, z1), but entity 3 (x5, y4, z2) is in a different position (or condition of existence). What you mean by “macro level” is described by (X, Y, Z). Thus, entities can have various positions but they can NEVER go beyond the macro level. So they can never have a variable such as P or N, but only X, Y, Z. Each entity can repeat its former condition (but I don’t know how to theoretically prove it!)

Papus79 wrote:
I know we're dealing in fuzzy terms when we get to free will or try to talk about free will vs determinism but it comes back to the basis that you don't craft your own personality from the bottom up, some combination of your biology and experiences crafts both your likes and dislikes, and you discover the rules of your own mind and biology as you mature which tends to draw the shape of the container of who you can be in the future.
So an individual includes some elements (variables) and they move on in time and can undergo change. OK. So we have the premises. Your ultimate conclusion addresses determinism.

In one of my discussions in this Forum, I once mentioned the problem of uncertainty concerning the validity of deterministic systems. There are some problems here:

- I definitely accept the limitation of variables (x, y, z), but I have not really found any justification to believe that the future condition of a given entity is predetermined without being perfectly (100%) predictable. If something is determined, then it must be fully
predictable.

- As implied above, I have no justification to demonstrate that an entity can ever return to any of its former conditions (coordinates). How can we conceptualize that in the movement of time? If it’s problematic to repeat a former condition, how could it be deterministic? In fact, it looks like a continual sequence. Yet, our memory (as you call it a function of consciousness) makes the impression of causality.
User avatar
Bohm2
Posts: 1129
Joined: February 23rd, 2013, 6:05 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell
Location: Canada

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Bohm2 »

Papus79 wrote:The consequence of that for me - any individual moment, call it a plank second for a stable basis, seems like it should be completely stable. If you could flip through a range of plank seconds, say ten, forward and backward like you were shuffling a deck of cards, each of those plank seconds should either be a) exactly the same or b) different only at the background radiation level but the same at the macro level, really the relevant range where we live.
I'm not sure I follow your argument but in relativity, spacetime is such that time measured along different trajectories is affected by differences in either gravity or velocity (time dilation). So a clock that is closer to the gravitational mass, appears to go more slowly than a clock that is more distant from the mass. Relativity also tells us that moving clocks run more slowly as their velocity increases. And the faster the relative velocity, the greater the magnitude of time dilation as there is no such thing as absolute motion in relativity. So this would appear to argue against your point that any individual moment is completely stable.
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Rr6 »

Mesons--- two quark bosons ---- are very short lived, however, they have structural-stable-integrity for that short moment of existence.

This is true for any fermion and boson.

Human, as structural-stable-integrity, has structural-stable-integrity beginning at conception and ending with death.

A photon's speed-of-radiation is a constant to all observers relative speeds, ergo it appears to exist within, and without{ beyond }, time.

This is a paradox or conundrum.

In addition the above, photons( EMRadiation } have a frequency ^v^v set that are at 90 degrees to each other.

So it appears that space- time dilation, or contraction, the frequency is shortened or lengthened.

So space-time dialation or contraction has three associated aspects in regards to photon{ EMRadiaiton }

1} speed/velocity = a constant--- 670,616,629 million miles per hour

2} frequency = a variable,---...~~~vvv/\/ \ / \/\vvv~~~

3} observer/clock--- ( @ ) or as ( * * )

H,mm another cosmic three-ness I had not yet considered.

I have an answer for entanglement but not for this above conundrum. ( * ? * )

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
User avatar
Papus79
Posts: 1798
Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Papus79 »

Bohm2 wrote: I'm not sure I follow your argument but in relativity, spacetime is such that time measured along different trajectories is affected by differences in either gravity or velocity (time dilation). So a clock that is closer to the gravitational mass, appears to go more slowly than a clock that is more distant from the mass. Relativity also tells us that moving clocks run more slowly as their velocity increases. And the faster the relative velocity, the greater the magnitude of time dilation as there is no such thing as absolute motion in relativity. So this would appear to argue against your point that any individual moment is completely stable.
I'm not sure that it does actually. You're saying that time has some complex and seemingly liquid attributes. That clearly does make things more complex to analyze but I don't think that causes any separation in the relationship between time and our actions.

-- Updated March 19th, 2017, 12:06 am to add the following --
Philo_soph wrote: - I definitely accept the limitation of variables (x, y, z), but I have not really found any justification to believe that the future condition of a given entity is predetermined without being perfectly (100%) predictable. If something is determined, then it must be fully
predictable.
That's the downside of language I suppose. It also raises the question - is anything really random per say or is it just that complex that we can't make sense of it? In the later case we'd just be encountering the state of human knowledge rather than an actuality.

Philo_soph wrote:- As implied above, I have no justification to demonstrate that an entity can ever return to any of its former conditions (coordinates). How can we conceptualize that in the movement of time? If it’s problematic to repeat a former condition, how could it be deterministic? In fact, it looks like a continual sequence. Yet, our memory (as you call it a function of consciousness) makes the impression of causality.
I think that's a different category of problem - along the lines of 'we aren't gods' so hitting reset or rewind on the universe isn't an option. About all we can do is try to replicate processes in miniature and see how they behave, hoping to capture a meaningful enough segment of the whole with enough redundant attempts. That also I suppose goes back to the state of human knowledge.
Humbly watching Youtube in Universe 25. - Me
Prothero
Posts: 51
Joined: June 13th, 2017, 7:40 pm

Re: Examining time's effect on determinism

Post by Prothero »

Bohm2 wrote:
Papus79 wrote:The consequence of that for me - any individual moment, call it a plank second for a stable basis, seems like it should be completely stable. If you could flip through a range of plank seconds, say ten, forward and backward like you were shuffling a deck of cards, each of those plank seconds should either be a) exactly the same or b) different only at the background radiation level but the same at the macro level, really the relevant range where we live.
I'm not sure I follow your argument but in relativity, spacetime is such that time measured along different trajectories is affected by differences in either gravity or velocity (time dilation). So a clock that is closer to the gravitational mass, appears to go more slowly than a clock that is more distant from the mass. Relativity also tells us that moving clocks run more slowly as their velocity increases. And the faster the relative velocity, the greater the magnitude of time dilation as there is no such thing as absolute motion in relativity. So this would appear to argue against your point that any individual moment is completely stable.
The subject of time is one of the great controversies in physics and philosophy.
I think for starters our common conception of time (which is basically Newtonian) that of some universal constant cosmic clock ticking away at a uniform rate is wrong. Time in that sense does not exist is an illusion.
In fact I do not think time as any of absolute independent entity exists. Time is rather a derivative concept from change, flux, flow. Our measurements of time are all based on some underlying process (the turning of the earth), the changing of the seasons, the swinging of a pendulum, the oscillations of a crystal, or the vibrations of a cesium atom. These processes are fundamental and time is derivative. Furthermore the rate at which these processes take place is affected by gravitation and acceleration and so the rate at which clocks based on these processes keep time is affected by these factors.
There is no universal now, for non causally related events, there is no universal simultaneous.
Now lots of physics texts will state that the past, the present and the future all already exist in some kind of frozen, static or iron block universe.
I do not believe that for a moment, but neither do I believe in the reality or independence of time. What I do believe is the universe is a process not an object and change is fundamental, it is a coming becoming, not a fixed being.
See IIya Prigogine " The End of Certainty" for a readable discussion of time and determinism, the irreversibility of far from equilibrium disappative process.
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