Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
Post Reply
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by Atla »

NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:09 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:01 pm
Steve3007 wrote: March 19th, 2021, 6:20 am It would partly depend on what you regard as an explanation; what you think it means to explain something.

If (as it seems reasonable to suppose) our brains are made from elementary particles - the same ones that non-conscious things are made from - then it should in principle be possible to put those elementary particles together to make a conscious brain.
First we need understand the depth of the Hard problem of consciousness. (except for Nick, no hope there)

Consciousness as in human consciousness (human consciousness / organism consciousness / AI consciousness), and consciousness as in the 'what it is like' phenomenological consciousness, may be two different things that co-occur in humans. The question isn't simply how they are the same thing, but also whether they are the same thing.
Maybe the second "type" of consciousness is in the superposition...lol
So to be conscious of your self and your experiences as a human is a different type of "what it is like ". Oh boy.
The same pseudo philosophical deepities reproduced by people who have zero understanding about the science of the field.
BTW I am still waiting for your evidence for the ..."superposition of consciousness, toxicity, radioactivity, combustion"
Human consciousness, and most life, seems to be a mix of classical and quantum behaviour (microtubules for example), but no one is doubting that something as simple as radioactive particles can be in superposition. Why did you bring up that one?
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
NickGaspar
Posts: 656
Joined: October 8th, 2019, 5:45 am
Favorite Philosopher: Many

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by NickGaspar »

Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:37 pm
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:09 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:01 pm
Steve3007 wrote: March 19th, 2021, 6:20 am It would partly depend on what you regard as an explanation; what you think it means to explain something.

If (as it seems reasonable to suppose) our brains are made from elementary particles - the same ones that non-conscious things are made from - then it should in principle be possible to put those elementary particles together to make a conscious brain.
First we need understand the depth of the Hard problem of consciousness. (except for Nick, no hope there)

Consciousness as in human consciousness (human consciousness / organism consciousness / AI consciousness), and consciousness as in the 'what it is like' phenomenological consciousness, may be two different things that co-occur in humans. The question isn't simply how they are the same thing, but also whether they are the same thing.
Maybe the second "type" of consciousness is in the superposition...lol
So to be conscious of your self and your experiences as a human is a different type of "what it is like ". Oh boy.
The same pseudo philosophical deepities reproduced by people who have zero understanding about the science of the field.
BTW I am still waiting for your evidence for the ..."superposition of consciousness, toxicity, radioactivity, combustion"
Human consciousness, and most life, seems to be a mix of classical and quantum behaviour (microtubules for example), but no one is doubting that something as simple as radioactive particles can be in superposition. Why did you bring up that one?
Superposition will tell....
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by Atla »

NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 3:40 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:37 pm
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:09 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:01 pm
First we need understand the depth of the Hard problem of consciousness. (except for Nick, no hope there)

Consciousness as in human consciousness (human consciousness / organism consciousness / AI consciousness), and consciousness as in the 'what it is like' phenomenological consciousness, may be two different things that co-occur in humans. The question isn't simply how they are the same thing, but also whether they are the same thing.
Maybe the second "type" of consciousness is in the superposition...lol
So to be conscious of your self and your experiences as a human is a different type of "what it is like ". Oh boy.
The same pseudo philosophical deepities reproduced by people who have zero understanding about the science of the field.
BTW I am still waiting for your evidence for the ..."superposition of consciousness, toxicity, radioactivity, combustion"
Human consciousness, and most life, seems to be a mix of classical and quantum behaviour (microtubules for example), but no one is doubting that something as simple as radioactive particles can be in superposition. Why did you bring up that one?
Superposition will tell....
And in addition to that, there's Schrödinger's cat, in other words there's no known reason why anything couldn't be in superposition. The only problem is that we already seem to have a huge classical-behaviour environment here on Earth, and as the size of the quantum system increases, it becomes impossible to avoid decoherence with this environment. Our technology is advancing and we are putting bigger and bigger things into superposition, but we will probably never reach the size of a human brain. But that's a technical limit, not a fundamental limit. As I said, according to current science, scale is not a fundamental factor to reality. Get over it already.
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
NickGaspar
Posts: 656
Joined: October 8th, 2019, 5:45 am
Favorite Philosopher: Many

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by NickGaspar »

Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 3:53 pm
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 3:40 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:37 pm
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:09 pm
Maybe the second "type" of consciousness is in the superposition...lol
So to be conscious of your self and your experiences as a human is a different type of "what it is like ". Oh boy.
The same pseudo philosophical deepities reproduced by people who have zero understanding about the science of the field.
BTW I am still waiting for your evidence for the ..."superposition of consciousness, toxicity, radioactivity, combustion"
Human consciousness, and most life, seems to be a mix of classical and quantum behaviour (microtubules for example), but no one is doubting that something as simple as radioactive particles can be in superposition. Why did you bring up that one?
Superposition will tell....
And in addition to that, there's Schrödinger's cat, in other words there's no known reason why anything couldn't be in superposition. The only problem is that we already seem to have a huge classical-behaviour environment here on Earth, and as the size of the quantum system increases, it becomes impossible to avoid decoherence with this environment. Our technology is advancing and we are putting bigger and bigger things into superposition, but we will probably never reach the size of a human brain. But that's a technical limit, not a fundamental limit. As I said, according to current science, scale is not a fundamental factor to reality. Get over it already.
The Schroedinger's cat lol.....right.....Or you can study physics and learn what the "cat" is all about
https://youtu.be/GerzZ6GDe-0
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by Atla »

NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 4:24 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 3:53 pm
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 3:40 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 2:37 pm
Human consciousness, and most life, seems to be a mix of classical and quantum behaviour (microtubules for example), but no one is doubting that something as simple as radioactive particles can be in superposition. Why did you bring up that one?
Superposition will tell....
And in addition to that, there's Schrödinger's cat, in other words there's no known reason why anything couldn't be in superposition. The only problem is that we already seem to have a huge classical-behaviour environment here on Earth, and as the size of the quantum system increases, it becomes impossible to avoid decoherence with this environment. Our technology is advancing and we are putting bigger and bigger things into superposition, but we will probably never reach the size of a human brain. But that's a technical limit, not a fundamental limit. As I said, according to current science, scale is not a fundamental factor to reality. Get over it already.
The Schroedinger's cat lol.....right.....Or you can study physics and learn what the "cat" is all about
https://youtu.be/GerzZ6GDe-0
Next time try to link a video that disagrees with what I wrote :)
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
NickGaspar
Posts: 656
Joined: October 8th, 2019, 5:45 am
Favorite Philosopher: Many

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by NickGaspar »

Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 4:36 pm
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 4:24 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 3:53 pm
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 3:40 pm
Superposition will tell....
And in addition to that, there's Schrödinger's cat, in other words there's no known reason why anything couldn't be in superposition. The only problem is that we already seem to have a huge classical-behaviour environment here on Earth, and as the size of the quantum system increases, it becomes impossible to avoid decoherence with this environment. Our technology is advancing and we are putting bigger and bigger things into superposition, but we will probably never reach the size of a human brain. But that's a technical limit, not a fundamental limit. As I said, according to current science, scale is not a fundamental factor to reality. Get over it already.
The Schroedinger's cat lol.....right.....Or you can study physics and learn what the "cat" is all about
https://youtu.be/GerzZ6GDe-0
Next time try to link a video that disagrees with what I wrote :)
This new agy stuff are not part of Philosophy, plus you need to post them in the forum of " Religion, Theism and Mythology".
Try watching the video of a real physicists explaining what Schrodinger's cat is really for.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by Atla »

NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 5:30 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 4:36 pm
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 4:24 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 3:53 pm
And in addition to that, there's Schrödinger's cat, in other words there's no known reason why anything couldn't be in superposition. The only problem is that we already seem to have a huge classical-behaviour environment here on Earth, and as the size of the quantum system increases, it becomes impossible to avoid decoherence with this environment. Our technology is advancing and we are putting bigger and bigger things into superposition, but we will probably never reach the size of a human brain. But that's a technical limit, not a fundamental limit. As I said, according to current science, scale is not a fundamental factor to reality. Get over it already.
The Schroedinger's cat lol.....right.....Or you can study physics and learn what the "cat" is all about
https://youtu.be/GerzZ6GDe-0
Next time try to link a video that disagrees with what I wrote :)
This new agy stuff are not part of Philosophy, plus you need to post them in the forum of " Religion, Theism and Mythology".
Try watching the video of a real physicists explaining what Schrodinger's cat is really for.
See my last comment
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
NickGaspar
Posts: 656
Joined: October 8th, 2019, 5:45 am
Favorite Philosopher: Many

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by NickGaspar »

Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 1:30 am
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 5:30 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 4:36 pm
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 4:24 pm

The Schroedinger's cat lol.....right.....Or you can study physics and learn what the "cat" is all about
https://youtu.be/GerzZ6GDe-0
Next time try to link a video that disagrees with what I wrote :)
This new agy stuff are not part of Philosophy, plus you need to post them in the forum of " Religion, Theism and Mythology".
Try watching the video of a real physicists explaining what Schrodinger's cat is really for.
See my last comment
If you think that the video agrees with your new age beliefs...then we finally found the problem .
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by Atla »

NickGaspar wrote: March 20th, 2021, 3:52 am
Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 1:30 am
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 5:30 pm
Atla wrote: March 19th, 2021, 4:36 pm
Next time try to link a video that disagrees with what I wrote :)
This new agy stuff are not part of Philosophy, plus you need to post them in the forum of " Religion, Theism and Mythology".
Try watching the video of a real physicists explaining what Schrodinger's cat is really for.
See my last comment
If you think that the video agrees with your new age beliefs...then we finally found the problem .
Yes we found the problem, you didn't understand the video you linked. Whether we interpret quantum behaviour as superpositions, or we go for more fringe interpretations like Pilot waves, or whatever, that doesn't change the fact that scale is not a fundamental factor to reality. How 'collapse' or however we want to view it occurs, is not relevant to the discussion either.
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
NickGaspar
Posts: 656
Joined: October 8th, 2019, 5:45 am
Favorite Philosopher: Many

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by NickGaspar »

Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 4:23 am
NickGaspar wrote: March 20th, 2021, 3:52 am
Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 1:30 am
NickGaspar wrote: March 19th, 2021, 5:30 pm
This new agy stuff are not part of Philosophy, plus you need to post them in the forum of " Religion, Theism and Mythology".
Try watching the video of a real physicists explaining what Schrodinger's cat is really for.
See my last comment
If you think that the video agrees with your new age beliefs...then we finally found the problem .
Yes we found the problem, you didn't understand the video you linked. Whether we interpret quantum behaviour as superpositions, or we go for more fringe interpretations like Pilot waves, or whatever, that doesn't change the fact that scale is not a fundamental factor to reality. How 'collapse' or however we want to view it occurs, is not relevant to the discussion either.
Strawman, Scale can't be fundamental (whatever that deepity means). It's an observer relative term. Properties on the other hand are contingent to large scale processes(molecular , chemical biological).
Yes collapse is irrelevant since it has nothing to do with larger scales of observations, so stop bringing superposition and it's collapse in the molecular scale and stop assuming that "superposition" is a characteristic of classical world properties.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by Atla »

NickGaspar wrote: March 20th, 2021, 5:21 am
Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 4:23 am
NickGaspar wrote: March 20th, 2021, 3:52 am
Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 1:30 am
See my last comment
If you think that the video agrees with your new age beliefs...then we finally found the problem .
Yes we found the problem, you didn't understand the video you linked. Whether we interpret quantum behaviour as superpositions, or we go for more fringe interpretations like Pilot waves, or whatever, that doesn't change the fact that scale is not a fundamental factor to reality. How 'collapse' or however we want to view it occurs, is not relevant to the discussion either.
Strawman, Scale can't be fundamental (whatever that deepity means). It's an observer relative term. Properties on the other hand are contingent to large scale processes(molecular , chemical biological).
Yes collapse is irrelevant since it has nothing to do with larger scales of observations, so stop bringing superposition and it's collapse in the molecular scale and stop assuming that "superposition" is a characteristic of classical world properties.
Every claim in this comment is either factually wrong, or contradicts what you said earlier, or is a strawman. LOL
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
NickGaspar
Posts: 656
Joined: October 8th, 2019, 5:45 am
Favorite Philosopher: Many

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by NickGaspar »

Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 5:41 am
NickGaspar wrote: March 20th, 2021, 5:21 am
Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 4:23 am
NickGaspar wrote: March 20th, 2021, 3:52 am
If you think that the video agrees with your new age beliefs...then we finally found the problem .
Yes we found the problem, you didn't understand the video you linked. Whether we interpret quantum behaviour as superpositions, or we go for more fringe interpretations like Pilot waves, or whatever, that doesn't change the fact that scale is not a fundamental factor to reality. How 'collapse' or however we want to view it occurs, is not relevant to the discussion either.
Strawman, Scale can't be fundamental (whatever that deepity means). It's an observer relative term. Properties on the other hand are contingent to large scale processes(molecular , chemical biological).
Yes collapse is irrelevant since it has nothing to do with larger scales of observations, so stop bringing superposition and it's collapse in the molecular scale and stop assuming that "superposition" is a characteristic of classical world properties.
Every claim in this comment is either factually wrong, or contradicts what you said earlier, or is a strawman. LOL
and how would you know?
....according to your claims...my comments may describe a superposition of your belief...lol
User avatar
NickGaspar
Posts: 656
Joined: October 8th, 2019, 5:45 am
Favorite Philosopher: Many

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by NickGaspar »

Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 5:41 am
Since its your tactic to derail conversations I will try to bring it back on track by pointing out the problem why your reasoning is problematic without taking in to account your sophistries.
Our current scientific paradigm ,a product of ~600 years of continues systematic work and observation, states that high level features (properties) of mater are the product of lower level mechanisms(mechanisms, not single particles).
This is why we no longer assume or search fundamental elements/substances in nature as the source of advanced properties.
We NO longer accept or search for Alkahest,Caloric, Coronium, Elan vital, Elixir of life,Luminiferous Aether, Miasma, Odic force, Panacea, Miasma, Phlogiston, ID, Universal Consciousness etc.

A deeper look in the microscopic scale of QM revealed an uncertainty in our measurements about the states of particles. QM particles can only display kinetic properties(weird but kinetic fueld by forces and their relations). Superposition describes the probable states of particles.i.e. Location,spin. There isn't a "superposition" for the probabilities of toxicity,combustion,liquidity etc of particles.
Your actual statement was :"There is no known reason why we should think that all those more complex things can't be in superposition."
-That is a nonsensical and factually useless statement. There are reasons NOT to use or assume superposition, because such properties are not found in particles but only in molecular structures. We don't have a formulation to calculate the superposition of itchiness of a particle lol because itchiness (or digestions or mind or wetness) is not part of the Quantum world.
The more complex they get the more advanced are the emergent properties.
There is also logic and the principle of the Null Hypothesis capable to identify the Default Position (rejection of the connection between A.(i.e. particles and b.(advanced physical properties) UNTIL we are able to falsify our initial rejection through objective empirical evidence
I find it really amazing that individuals in 2021 can even say such scientifically illiterate things...
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by Atla »

NickGaspar wrote: March 20th, 2021, 6:14 am
Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 5:41 am
Since its your tactic to derail conversations I will try to bring it back on track by pointing out the problem why your reasoning is problematic without taking in to account your sophistries.
Our current scientific paradigm ,a product of ~600 years of continues systematic work and observation, states that high level features (properties) of mater are the product of lower level mechanisms(mechanisms, not single particles).
This is why we no longer assume or search fundamental elements/substances in nature as the source of advanced properties.
We NO longer accept or search for Alkahest,Caloric, Coronium, Elan vital, Elixir of life,Luminiferous Aether, Miasma, Odic force, Panacea, Miasma, Phlogiston, ID, Universal Consciousness etc.

A deeper look in the microscopic scale of QM revealed an uncertainty in our measurements about the states of particles. QM particles can only display kinetic properties(weird but kinetic fueld by forces and their relations). Superposition describes the probable states of particles.i.e. Location,spin. There isn't a "superposition" for the probabilities of toxicity,combustion,liquidity etc of particles.
Your actual statement was :"There is no known reason why we should think that all those more complex things can't be in superposition."
-That is a nonsensical and factually useless statement. There are reasons NOT to use or assume superposition, because such properties are not found in particles but only in molecular structures. We don't have a formulation to calculate the superposition of itchiness of a particle lol because itchiness (or digestions or mind or wetness) is not part of the Quantum world.
The more complex they get the more advanced are the emergent properties.
There is also logic and the principle of the Null Hypothesis capable to identify the Default Position (rejection of the connection between A.(i.e. particles and b.(advanced physical properties) UNTIL we are able to falsify our initial rejection through objective empirical evidence
I find it really amazing that individuals in 2021 can even say such scientifically illiterate things...
Yes that is the kind of strong emergence (in the philosophical sense) / magical thinking, that I refuted by showing that there are no such fundamental scales to reality. You don't get that big things are the sum of small things. You also confuse scientifically measurable properties like spins with subjective properties like itchiness, that's nonsense. You also don't seem to realize that elementary particles have properties. You also have no idea what superposition is. What a trainwreck both scientifically and philosophically.
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
NickGaspar
Posts: 656
Joined: October 8th, 2019, 5:45 am
Favorite Philosopher: Many

Re: Is strong emergentism a valid view ? And can special sciences have their own laws independent of physics ?

Post by NickGaspar »

Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 6:43 am
NickGaspar wrote: March 20th, 2021, 6:14 am
Atla wrote: March 20th, 2021, 5:41 am
Since its your tactic to derail conversations I will try to bring it back on track by pointing out the problem why your reasoning is problematic without taking in to account your sophistries.
Our current scientific paradigm ,a product of ~600 years of continues systematic work and observation, states that high level features (properties) of mater are the product of lower level mechanisms(mechanisms, not single particles).
This is why we no longer assume or search fundamental elements/substances in nature as the source of advanced properties.
We NO longer accept or search for Alkahest,Caloric, Coronium, Elan vital, Elixir of life,Luminiferous Aether, Miasma, Odic force, Panacea, Miasma, Phlogiston, ID, Universal Consciousness etc.

A deeper look in the microscopic scale of QM revealed an uncertainty in our measurements about the states of particles. QM particles can only display kinetic properties(weird but kinetic fueld by forces and their relations). Superposition describes the probable states of particles.i.e. Location,spin. There isn't a "superposition" for the probabilities of toxicity,combustion,liquidity etc of particles.
Your actual statement was :"There is no known reason why we should think that all those more complex things can't be in superposition."
-That is a nonsensical and factually useless statement. There are reasons NOT to use or assume superposition, because such properties are not found in particles but only in molecular structures. We don't have a formulation to calculate the superposition of itchiness of a particle lol because itchiness (or digestions or mind or wetness) is not part of the Quantum world.
The more complex they get the more advanced are the emergent properties.
There is also logic and the principle of the Null Hypothesis capable to identify the Default Position (rejection of the connection between A.(i.e. particles and b.(advanced physical properties) UNTIL we are able to falsify our initial rejection through objective empirical evidence
I find it really amazing that individuals in 2021 can even say such scientifically illiterate things...
Yes that is the kind of strong emergence (in the philosophical sense) / magical thinking, that I refuted by showing that there are no such fundamental scales to reality. You don't get that big things are the sum of small things. You also confuse scientifically measurable properties like spins with subjective properties like itchiness, that's nonsense. You also don't seem to realize that elementary particles have properties. You also have no idea what superposition is. What a trainwreck both scientifically and philosophically.
You can not refute a term that is used by an observer to classify levels of causality...
You cannot refute that low level mechanisms do not display high level features(since it is an objective observation), without offering a verified example where advanced properties are observable as a fundamental property of its parts.

-"You also confuse scientifically measurable properties like spins with subjective properties like itchiness, that's nonsense."
-Itchiness has a physical underpinning interpreted by your brain as that. That underpinning demands the existence of the molecular structure of your skin.....

-" You also don't seem to realize that elementary particles have properties."
-You don't seem to realize that they only display energetic/kinetic properties. You also need to provide objective evidence for those additional properties you have faith on.

-" You also have no idea what superposition is."
-Well who claimed that ...toxicity, elasticity, hardness, liquidity etc etc.....are superpositions of particles (like location) lol, so you do understand the irony in that statement of yours, right!!!!?

-"What a trainwreck both scientifically and philosophically."
-Sure, I will accept your self critique....
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

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