Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by Atla »

Pattern-chaser wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:51 am
Atla wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:40 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:14 am
Atla wrote: June 24th, 2022, 10:16 am
You are contradicting yourself all over the place. I said:

Cause and effect in and of itself can be seen as logical, but your treatment of it isn't.
....are you ok? Dude, we may have to abort the mission there... . No comprende. Debes loqui linguam alienam.
I think you might have some wires crossed, can't follow even the simplest of sentences.
I find it difficult to communicate with someone whose text (very) often assumes they are the teacher, and I am a student, helpless without guidance, and desperate for it. It just gets my back up. 😠 I know I should be more mature about it... 😐
I'm somewhat guilty of that too, I'm roughly 25% troll which I openly admit, but at least I can back up my claims with arguments, and I can't remember losing a debate on philosophy forums.

But these Kantians and Kantian phenomenologists always seem to take it to the next level. Because they are just RIGHT, because Kant was RIGHT, and because everyone knew and knows that Kant was RIGHT. Like, about everything and in every way, always and forever.

So it doesn't even occur to them that sometimes they would actually have to make a case for their claims. Doesn't even cross their minds that they should sometimes actually pay attention to what the other person is saying.
True philosophy points to the Moon
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by Atla »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 12:08 pm
Pattern-chaser wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:51 am
Atla wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:40 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:14 am

....are you ok? Dude, we may have to abort the mission there... . No comprende. Debes loqui linguam alienam.
I think you might have some wires crossed, can't follow even the simplest of sentences.
I find it difficult to communicate with someone whose text (very) often assumes they are the teacher, and I am a student, helpless without guidance, and desperate for it. It just gets my back up. 😠 I know I should be more mature about it... 😐
PC!

Love you brother, but don't let things (emotions) get the best of you. If you took the time to study the argument, and where it was going, I think you would conclude that either the student is in need of some remedial homework, or is not serious in his approach to discourse. Cause and effect, as I generally described, is a "logical" process. Pretty basic stuff.

Think of it this way, I suppose the game that's being played is like the rule difference's between high school and the NFL.
Yes we can always stretch the meaning of "logical", to the point where it's no longer relevant to reality.

All berries are rocks. All rocks are sharks. Therefore all berries are sharks. That too was logical, and we may have learned something about God here.
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
psyreporter
Posts: 1022
Joined: August 15th, 2019, 7:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by psyreporter »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:57 am PR!


Thank you for the question. The ground would be the cognitive need for curiosity, or the metaphysical Will to be. A fixed, intrinsic or innate need, a priori. Of course, the qualitative features of self-consciousness allows for things like curiosity as well as things like intuition to manifest. And it does so through the cognitive process of the intellect. Meaning, in this context, consider the logic of causation as a means to an end. In pure reason or logic, if the end goal is to have some level of "certainty", it is not those exclusive 'qualitive' features that will get us there. The complimentary feature to 'quality' then, would be of 'quantity'. As an example, the infamous synthetic a priori cosmological argument would rear its metaphorical head:

Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its existence.
The universe began to exist.
Therefore, the universe has a cause of its existence.
It is a nonsensical argument in my opinion because a begin implies the start of a pattern and a pattern is bound by observation or 'consciousness'. That implies that consciousness necessarily precedes a pattern on a fundamental level.

Quantum Post Selection shows that consciousness can exert physical effects in the past. That implies simply that what one assumes to be 'physical reality' can be changed from the future backwards in time and thus it undermines any potential factor that can be considered 'certainty' as basis for causality. Therefore, it would also disprove Kant's reasoning.

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:57 amIn consciousness, from a physical/meta-physical vantage point, we have both quantity and quality (of the foregoing cognitive process) working for us, respectively. The quantity is the object, the quality is the subject. The trick is to transcend both the subject-object dichotomy to effect some level of "certainty". Kind of like the ToE where QM and relativity can be integrated and resolved (?).
No, I would not agree with that. Certainty as a concept is merely sought after by a human within the context of his/her interests.

If a human finds satisfaction in a certain level of usability, for example the result of repeatabaility in time, then that is merely an utilitarian concept and not a fundamental concept. A human may be happy with an utilitarian concept, but that's 'for as long as it lasts'.

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:57 amWith respect to backward causation, yes, I'm familiar with that phenomenon. At it's core, it does not only imply a logically structured determined universe of cause and effect and its related laws, but more specifically an indetermined one suggesting through analogy that both free-will and determinism can co-exist (compatibilism). Of course, there is some debate over such an inference... .
I do not believe that it is that simple. How can it be said that determinism is applicable why indeterminism is applicable? Isn't the mere potential for indeterminism evidence that anything is indetermined? What's left is an experience but how can the nature of that be judged in order to arrive at certainty?

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:57 amNonetheless, you raise a very intriguing possibility. One way to envision this, could be the ability to step outside the block universe model of spacetime... . Is the quantum pigeon hole reminiscent of the Hawking informational paradox?
The block Universe concept implies that all time and all space is predetermined. Atla is a proponent of that idea.
Atla wrote: January 8th, 2022, 8:44 am If time goes in a circle (which it logically should), we can have a temporally ordered series of events with no beginning or end. No point on a circle is the beginning or the end, yet the circle is finite.
psyreporter wrote: February 6th, 2022, 5:21 am Can you explain in detail the ground upon which you believe that time being of finite substance within a circle shape makes 'sense'?
Because then there is no need for change, there is only the illusion of change as it should be. The past doesn't have to magically disappear, the future doesn't have to magically appear out of nothing. Past present and future are equally real, and can form a complete, circular chain of events.

In practive this probably means that the universe is an "unchanging perpetuum mobile", a block universe of circular dimensions. So eventually our region of the the universe will start to contract and collapse back into a singularity, which is one and the same singularity at the same point in time as the Big Bang was. It's completely counterintuitive that a distant point in our futurte is a distant point in our past, but the only picture that makes perfect logical sense.
Block universe theory
Block universe theory
block-universe.jpg (17.05 KiB) Viewed 1278 times

My suggestion would be that there is more then what can be considered 'Being' while in the same time that does not imply anything with regard relevance to the scope of 'meaningfulness'.
PsyReporter.com | “If life were to be good as it was, there would be no reason to exist.”
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

psyreporter wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:24 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:57 am PR!


Thank you for the question. The ground would be the cognitive need for curiosity, or the metaphysical Will to be. A fixed, intrinsic or innate need, a priori. Of course, the qualitative features of self-consciousness allows for things like curiosity as well as things like intuition to manifest. And it does so through the cognitive process of the intellect. Meaning, in this context, consider the logic of causation as a means to an end. In pure reason or logic, if the end goal is to have some level of "certainty", it is not those exclusive 'qualitive' features that will get us there. The complimentary feature to 'quality' then, would be of 'quantity'. As an example, the infamous synthetic a priori cosmological argument would rear its metaphorical head:

Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its existence.
The universe began to exist.
Therefore, the universe has a cause of its existence.
It is a nonsensical argument in my opinion because a begin implies the start of a pattern and a pattern is bound by observation or 'consciousness'. That implies that consciousness necessarily precedes a pattern on a fundamental level.

Quantum Post Selection shows that consciousness can exert physical effects in the past. That implies simply that what one assumes to be 'physical reality' can be changed from the future backwards in time and thus it undermines any potential factor that can be considered 'certainty' as basis for causality. Therefore, it would also disprove Kant's reasoning.

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:57 amIn consciousness, from a physical/meta-physical vantage point, we have both quantity and quality (of the foregoing cognitive process) working for us, respectively. The quantity is the object, the quality is the subject. The trick is to transcend both the subject-object dichotomy to effect some level of "certainty". Kind of like the ToE where QM and relativity can be integrated and resolved (?).
No, I would not agree with that. Certainty as a concept is merely sought after by a human within the context of his/her interests.

If a human finds satisfaction in a certain level of usability, for example the result of repeatabaility in time, then that is merely an utilitarian concept and not a fundamental concept. A human may be happy with an utilitarian concept, but that's 'for as long as it lasts'.

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:57 amWith respect to backward causation, yes, I'm familiar with that phenomenon. At it's core, it does not only imply a logically structured determined universe of cause and effect and its related laws, but more specifically an indetermined one suggesting through analogy that both free-will and determinism can co-exist (compatibilism). Of course, there is some debate over such an inference... .
I do not believe that it is that simple. How can it be said that determinism is applicable why indeterminism is applicable? Isn't the mere potential for indeterminism evidence that anything is indetermined? What's left is an experience but how can the nature of that be judged in order to arrive at certainty?

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:57 amNonetheless, you raise a very intriguing possibility. One way to envision this, could be the ability to step outside the block universe model of spacetime... . Is the quantum pigeon hole reminiscent of the Hawking informational paradox?
The block Universe concept implies that all time and all space is predetermined. Atla is a proponent of that idea.
Atla wrote: January 8th, 2022, 8:44 am If time goes in a circle (which it logically should), we can have a temporally ordered series of events with no beginning or end. No point on a circle is the beginning or the end, yet the circle is finite.
psyreporter wrote: February 6th, 2022, 5:21 am Can you explain in detail the ground upon which you believe that time being of finite substance within a circle shape makes 'sense'?
Because then there is no need for change, there is only the illusion of change as it should be. The past doesn't have to magically disappear, the future doesn't have to magically appear out of nothing. Past present and future are equally real, and can form a complete, circular chain of events.

In practive this probably means that the universe is an "unchanging perpetuum mobile", a block universe of circular dimensions. So eventually our region of the the universe will start to contract and collapse back into a singularity, which is one and the same singularity at the same point in time as the Big Bang was. It's completely counterintuitive that a distant point in our futurte is a distant point in our past, but the only picture that makes perfect logical sense.

block-universe.jpg


My suggestion would be that there is more then what can be considered 'Being' while in the same time that does not imply anything with regard relevance to the scope of 'meaningfulness'.
PR!

Thank you! Not following you there.

1. To your first point, what is nonsensical about things that exist a priori and logical necessity?

2. "Certainly" in your context, dichotomizes reality by your description of Subjectivity only (which I have no quarrel with in and of itself). So your level of certainty (from your brief explanation) is only half the equation.

3. Not following you there on the determinism/indeterminism thing, sorry. Could you perhaps provide for some analogical foundation(s)? Otherwise, we can simply analogize to QM for our sense of indeterminism via Heisenberg and the like.

4. Block universe is a way to look at time objectively, and with another degree of certainty. Certainly, certainty itself is that which seems to be illusive.

An easier way to look at this particular problem, could be to theorize where Singularity came from. Any clue to that level of [un]certainty?
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Pattern-chaser wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:51 am I find it difficult to communicate with someone whose text (very) often assumes they are the teacher, and I am a student, helpless without guidance, and desperate for it. It just gets my back up. 😠 I know I should be more mature about it... 😐
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 12:08 pm ...don't let things (emotions) get the best of you. If you took the time to study the argument, and where it was going, I think you would conclude that either the student is in need of some remedial homework, or is not serious in his approach to discourse. Cause and effect, as I generally described, is a "logical" process. Pretty basic stuff.
...and even when you respond, you still seem to assume the role of a teacher. Did it ever occur to you that you might be the one in need of tuition (not from me!)?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by Pattern-chaser »

psyreporter wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:24 pm The block Universe concept implies that all time and all space is predetermined.
I fear you have been let down by the deep embedding of time in our language. If all time is one, so to speak, there can be no "predetermined", can there? 😉
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by Atla »

Pattern-chaser wrote: June 24th, 2022, 2:27 pm
psyreporter wrote: June 24th, 2022, 1:24 pm The block Universe concept implies that all time and all space is predetermined.
I fear you have been let down by the deep embedding of time in our language. If all time is one, so to speak, there can be no "predetermined", can there? 😉
Well spotted, I didn't feel like pointing it out :)

Also, the problem of determinism vs free will becomes mind-melting in a block universe of circular dimensions (a hyperspherical block universe). If I "choose" to do X now, then not only is that choice determined, but also all the future repercussions of that choice are determined. But my future continues as my past, so I even made changes to my past which changes may have contributed to me being here the way I am right now.

It all goes around, it all goes around infinitely, and yet nothing ever changed, this end result was the only state of the universe that exists.

Kinda like a time-travel paradox where you go back in time, and change the past, which change enables you to go back in time in the first place. Just on a universal scale, and going over infinitely yet not at all.

So if this is true, then the question is, how much of a "difference" do our choices can actually make?
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
Astro Cat
Posts: 451
Joined: June 17th, 2022, 2:51 am
Favorite Philosopher: Bernard dEspagnat
Location: USA

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by Astro Cat »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 9:04 am AC!

Ok, I think we can agree now that you see my point about the normalcy of everyone's ability to hold beliefs and in part, what that might mean. But, the "non-cognitive" part you speak about is a bit troubling, or at least is an intriguing enough concept worthy of more discussion. First, I admire your passion for logic (feeling and logic somehow/illogically mixed together), so I'll start with that concern.

First, for clarification, are you saying that all things in life (remember the concept of a God is all encompassing) are somehow logical? Excluding emotions, for example, do you think consciousness/cognition itself, operates logically within the framework of formal logic?
I think that all ontology is logical, specifically Aristotelian, and by that I mean that I think anything exists exists as itself, and can't both exist as itself and something contradictory at the same time and in the same respect.

I think that this includes God if a god exists.

I don't think it's possible for anything ontological to be illogical, and furthermore I think anybody that asserts something might be immediately self-refutes because logic in this context is incorrigible and transcendental.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
--Richard Feynman
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Astro Cat wrote: June 25th, 2022, 1:27 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 9:04 am AC!

Ok, I think we can agree now that you see my point about the normalcy of everyone's ability to hold beliefs and in part, what that might mean. But, the "non-cognitive" part you speak about is a bit troubling, or at least is an intriguing enough concept worthy of more discussion. First, I admire your passion for logic (feeling and logic somehow/illogically mixed together), so I'll start with that concern.

First, for clarification, are you saying that all things in life (remember the concept of a God is all encompassing) are somehow logical? Excluding emotions, for example, do you think consciousness/cognition itself, operates logically within the framework of formal logic?
I think that all ontology is logical, specifically Aristotelian, and by that I mean that I think anything exists exists as itself, and can't both exist as itself and something contradictory at the same time and in the same respect.

I think that this includes God if a god exists.

I don't think it's possible for anything ontological to be illogical, and furthermore I think anybody that asserts something might be immediately self-refutes because logic in this context is incorrigible and transcendental.
AC!

Thanks! I'll go ahead and take this opportunity to suusinctly challenge your assertion that all of ontology is ogical, with at least two quick questions.

1. Driving a car while one is daydreaming being on a beach, is your conscious mind on the beach or your subconscious mind?

2. Does the Will hold primacy over the intellect or does the intellect hold primacy over the Will?

Hint: the practical implications of item 2 relates to feelings and logic during the cognitive process.
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Atla wrote: June 24th, 2022, 3:28 pm The problem of determinism vs free will becomes mind-melting in a block universe of circular dimensions (a hyperspherical block universe). If I "choose" to do X now, then not only is that choice determined, but also all the future repercussions of that choice are determined. But my future continues as my past, so I even made changes to my past which changes may have contributed to me being here the way I am right now.

It all goes around, it all goes around infinitely, and yet nothing ever changed, this end result was the only state of the universe that exists.
I think the problems emerge when we attempt to adopt a perspective that we cannot and do not have, except in our imaginations. I think the universe is one thing that has dimensions of space and of time too. But we do not see things that way. We apparently live our lives within a time-stream that doesn't really exist, we suspect. Nevertheless, we do as we do, and we live out our lives in an apparently linear chronological fashion. I offer this apparent difference to suggest that we might have free will within the reality we think we live in, although a Gods-eye-view perspective (or something similar) offers a view that is quite different.

Maybe free will determinism can co-exist, however awkwardly?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
snt
Posts: 110
Joined: June 2nd, 2022, 4:43 am

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by snt »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 2:00 pm 1. To your first point, what is nonsensical about things that exist a priori and logical necessity?
According to Kant, causality is considered a necessity of space and time.

"For Kant, the concepts of both causality and necessity arise from precisely the operations of our understanding—and, indeed, they arise entirely a priori as pure concepts or categories of the understanding. It is in precisely this way that Kant thinks that he has an answer to Hume’s skeptical problem of induction: the problem, in Kant’s terms, of grounding the transition from merely “comparative” to “strict universality” (A91–92/B123–124).

Succession is necessary; … the effect does not merely follow upon the cause but is posited through it and follows from it. The strict universality of the rule is certainly not a property of empirical rules, which, through induction, can acquire nothing but comparative universality: i.e., extensive utility.
"

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-causality/

As mentioned before, Kant's theory is assumptuously based on the concept reason and he never went into depth about the nature of reason.

plato.stanford.edu on Kant's reason mentions the following:

"we might note that Kant rarely discusses reason as such. This leaves a difficult interpretative task: just what is Kant’s general and positive account of reason?

The first thing to note is Kant’s bold claim that reason is the arbiter of truth in all judgments—empirical as well as metaphysical. Unfortunately, he barely develops this thought, and the issue has attracted surprisingly little attention in the literature.
"

In the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals Kant argued that reason is 'given' by nature to serve a purpose.

"Nevertheless, reason is given to us as a practical faculty, that is, one that is meant to have an influence on the will."

When the evidence shows that conscious experience can exert an effect on physical reality backwards in time, then Kant's reasoning is proven wrong and causality cannot be considered a necessity.

It could imply that non-locality - a world of meaning beyond/preceding physical reality (a world preceding subjective experience or laying beyond it from within that subjective experience) - is primary and that causality is merely appearance that can change in time.

The world is non-local all the way down
“Our result proves that non-locality is an even more fundamental property of our world than was previously known,” says Giacomini.
https://insidetheperimeter.ca/the-world ... -way-down/

Is nonlocality inherent in all identical particles in the universe?
The photon emitted by the monitor screen and the photon from the distant galaxy at the depths of the universe seem to be entangled only by their identical nature (by their 'kind'). This is a great mystery that science will soon confront.
https://phys.org/news/2020-03-nonlocali ... verse.html

Non-local Universe - Reality as a Dream
Ultimately this means that all of physical reality as we perceive it is an illusion and exists only in an illusionary dream like state. Instead of reality being viewed as Newtonian and mechanistic, under the context of non-locality it is probably best understood of as a dream for it has the same properties.

What this seems to imply is that the entire universe is a mental construct and exists purely in a psychological gestalt, for within a psychological gestalt, space, dimensions and time are all constructs.

https://www.gestaltreality.com/articles ... -universe/

The idea that a non-local Universe would be like a dream or illusion might be invalid, but it shows that reality would be perceived as other than a world in which causality is a certainty.

It shows a door to a different world. A world that lays beyond logic and knowledge (that precedes it when seen from a fundamental perspective).

A door to 'beyond logic and knowledge'
A door to 'beyond logic and knowledge'

It seems that philosophers and scientists have predicted that at some point in time, humans should start exploring that 'other' world. A world of meaning that is not 'repeatable'.

"Within Western philosophy, the realm beyond space has traditionally been considered a realm beyond physics — the plane of God’s existence in Christian theology. In the early eighteenth century, Gottfried Leibniz’s “monads” — which he imagined to be the primitive elements of the universe — existed, like God, outside space and time. His theory was a step toward emergent space-time, but it was still metaphysical, with only a vague connection to the world of concrete things.

Albert Einstein foresaw these difficulties. “Perhaps... we must also give up, by principle, the space-time continuum,” he wrote. “It is not unimaginable that human ingenuity will some day find methods which will make it possible to proceed along such a path. At the present time, however, such a program looks like an attempt to breathe in empty space.


https://gizmodo.com/a-new-way-of-thinki ... 1741498475
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by Atla »

snt wrote: June 25th, 2022, 4:42 pm When the evidence shows that conscious experience can exert an effect on physical reality backwards in time, then Kant's reasoning is proven wrong and causality cannot be considered a necessity.

It could imply that non-locality - a world of meaning beyond/preceding physical reality (a world preceding subjective experience or laying beyond it from within that subjective experience) - is primary and that causality is merely appearance that can change in time.

The world is non-local all the way down
“Our result proves that non-locality is an even more fundamental property of our world than was previously known,” says Giacomini.

Is nonlocality inherent in all identical particles in the universe?
The photon emitted by the monitor screen and the photon from the distant galaxy at the depths of the universe seem to be entangled only by their identical nature (by their 'kind'). This is a great mystery that science will soon confront.

Non-local Universe - Reality as a Dream
Ultimately this means that all of physical reality as we perceive it is an illusion and exists only in an illusionary dream like state. Instead of reality being viewed as Newtonian and mechanistic, under the context of non-locality it is probably best understood of as a dream for it has the same properties.

What this seems to imply is that the entire universe is a mental construct and exists purely in a psychological gestalt, for within a psychological gestalt, space, dimensions and time are all constructs.

The idea that a non-local Universe would be like a dream or illusion might be invalid, but it shows that reality would be perceived as other than a world in which causality is a certainty.

It shows a door to a different world. A world that lays beyond logic and knowledge (that precedes it when seen from a fundamental perspective).
Kant may have been wrong, but you also may have overdone it.

It was not shown that conscious experience can effect reality backwards in time, that's a common myth about the eraser experiments. That's the same mistake about time, just backwards. Instead it was shown that time (at least as we imagine it) never existed in the first place.

Cause and effect exists, but the "chain" of cause and effect is timeless. Also, it's not really a "chain" as we imagine it, since everything is effecting everything else, only constrained by the speed of light, there are no neatly separated objects.

And it was shown that conscious experience and physical reality are one and the same thing (a form of nondualism, which is just alien to Western philosophy).

Yes the world is non-local, but that doesn't mean that the world is a dream or illusion, or a mental construct. It means that the world is non-local, in other words not only is Kantian space and time not fundamental, but not even Einsteinian spacetime may be fundamental, it may be more like an emergent feature of the quantum world. Which might explain why they have so much difficulty unifying QM and GR.
True philosophy points to the Moon
snt
Posts: 110
Joined: June 2nd, 2022, 4:43 am

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by snt »

Atla wrote: June 26th, 2022, 2:02 amKant may have been wrong, but you also may have overdone it.
Yes, you are right. My argument was intended to be limited to Kant's argument that causality is a certainty.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-causality/
Atla wrote: June 26th, 2022, 2:02 amIt was not shown that conscious experience can effect reality backwards in time, that's a common myth about the eraser experiments. That's the same mistake about time, just backwards. Instead it was shown that time (at least as we imagine it) never existed in the first place.
When it is shown that consciousness can change physical reality in the past, no matter how it can be explained, it shows that causality isn't certain.

Can We Change The Past?
the delayed choice experiment illustrates how what happens in the present can change what happens(ed) in the past. It also shows how time can go backwards, how cause and effect can be reversed, and how the future caused the past.

In 2007, scientists in France shot photons into an apparatus and showed that their actions could retroactively change something which had already happened.

https://iheartintelligence.com/quantum- ... sent-past/

Another study shows that particles across the Universe can be post-selected by interaction in the future. That means that when free will is a valid concept, consciousness can exert an effect on physical reality in the past.

🕊️ Pigeon paradox reveals cosmic connections
Post-selection links any two particles every time their quantum properties are measured, no matter where they are in the universe. In other words, all particles everywhere could be linked, provided they have been post-selected in some way. “Is that mind-blowing or is that mind-blowing?”
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... nnections/

Atla wrote: June 26th, 2022, 2:02 amCause and effect exists, but the "chain" of cause and effect is timeless. Also, it's not really a "chain" as we imagine it, since everything is effecting everything else, only constrained by the speed of light, there are no neatly separated objects.

And it was shown that conscious experience and physical reality are one and the same thing (a form of nondualism, which is just alien to Western philosophy).

Yes the world is non-local, but that doesn't mean that the world is a dream or illusion, or a mental construct. It means that the world is non-local, in other words not only is Kantian space and time not fundamental, but not even Einsteinian spacetime may be fundamental, it may be more like an emergent feature of the quantum world. Which might explain why they have so much difficulty unifying QM and GR.
No, non-locality would not be an emergent feature. How could emergence of non-locality as a feature possibly be conceived of?

Non-locality as a term has a reference to locality, the familiar 'repeatable world'. If you would stripe that word away, what's left is 'non' and there is not much more to say about it.

In the same time, it can be established that that 'non' concerns an 'other' world of meaning.

Albert Einstein: “Perhaps... we must also give up, by principle, the space-time continuum,” he wrote. “It is not unimaginable that human ingenuity will some day find methods which will make it possible to proceed along such a path. At the present time, however, such a program looks like an attempt to breathe in empty space.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by Atla »

snt wrote: June 26th, 2022, 5:38 amWhen it is shown that consciousness can change physical reality in the past, no matter how it can be explained, it shows that causality isn't certain.

Can We Change The Past?
the delayed choice experiment illustrates how what happens in the present can change what happens(ed) in the past. It also shows how time can go backwards, how cause and effect can be reversed, and how the future caused the past.

In 2007, scientists in France shot photons into an apparatus and showed that their actions could retroactively change something which had already happened.
https://iheartintelligence.com/quantum- ... sent-past/

Another study shows that particles across the Universe can be post-selected by interaction in the future. That means that when free will is a valid concept, consciousness can exert an effect on physical reality in the past.

🕊️ Pigeon paradox reveals cosmic connections
Post-selection links any two particles every time their quantum properties are measured, no matter where they are in the universe. In other words, all particles everywhere could be linked, provided they have been post-selected in some way. “Is that mind-blowing or is that mind-blowing?”
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... nnections/
Again, your eraser link is lying, this has been debunked enough times. There was never any known "change" in the past in any of these experiments. Instead time as we know doesn't exist at all, past present and future are one.
No, non-locality would not be an emergent feature. How could emergence of non-locality as a feature possibly be conceived of?

Non-locality as a term has a reference to locality, the familiar 'repeatable world'. If you would stripe that word away, what's left is 'non' and there is not much more to say about it.

In the same time, it can be established that that 'non' concerns an 'other' world of meaning.

Albert Einstein: “Perhaps... we must also give up, by principle, the space-time continuum,” he wrote. “It is not unimaginable that human ingenuity will some day find methods which will make it possible to proceed along such a path. At the present time, however, such a program looks like an attempt to breathe in empty space.”
I said spacetime may be an emergent feature (of the nonlocal quantum universe).
Kinda like how when you put enough atoms together, a chair "emerges", in other words of course this is soft emergence.
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: Theism: Not the Foundation of Logic (TAG defeater)

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

snt wrote: June 25th, 2022, 4:42 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 2:00 pm 1. To your first point, what is nonsensical about things that exist a priori and logical necessity?
According to Kant, causality is considered a necessity of space and time.

"For Kant, the concepts of both causality and necessity arise from precisely the operations of our understanding—and, indeed, they arise entirely a priori as pure concepts or categories of the understanding. It is in precisely this way that Kant thinks that he has an answer to Hume’s skeptical problem of induction: the problem, in Kant’s terms, of grounding the transition from merely “comparative” to “strict universality” (A91–92/B123–124).

Succession is necessary; … the effect does not merely follow upon the cause but is posited through it and follows from it. The strict universality of the rule is certainly not a property of empirical rules, which, through induction, can acquire nothing but comparative universality: i.e., extensive utility.
"

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-causality/

As mentioned before, Kant's theory is assumptuously based on the concept reason and he never went into depth about the nature of reason.

plato.stanford.edu on Kant's reason mentions the following:

"we might note that Kant rarely discusses reason as such. This leaves a difficult interpretative task: just what is Kant’s general and positive account of reason?

The first thing to note is Kant’s bold claim that reason is the arbiter of truth in all judgments—empirical as well as metaphysical. Unfortunately, he barely develops this thought, and the issue has attracted surprisingly little attention in the literature.
"

In the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals Kant argued that reason is 'given' by nature to serve a purpose.

"Nevertheless, reason is given to us as a practical faculty, that is, one that is meant to have an influence on the will."

When the evidence shows that conscious experience can exert an effect on physical reality backwards in time, then Kant's reasoning is proven wrong and causality cannot be considered a necessity.

It could imply that non-locality - a world of meaning beyond/preceding physical reality (a world preceding subjective experience or laying beyond it from within that subjective experience) - is primary and that causality is merely appearance that can change in time.

The world is non-local all the way down
“Our result proves that non-locality is an even more fundamental property of our world than was previously known,” says Giacomini.
https://insidetheperimeter.ca/the-world ... -way-down/

Is nonlocality inherent in all identical particles in the universe?
The photon emitted by the monitor screen and the photon from the distant galaxy at the depths of the universe seem to be entangled only by their identical nature (by their 'kind'). This is a great mystery that science will soon confront.
https://phys.org/news/2020-03-nonlocali ... verse.html

Non-local Universe - Reality as a Dream
Ultimately this means that all of physical reality as we perceive it is an illusion and exists only in an illusionary dream like state. Instead of reality being viewed as Newtonian and mechanistic, under the context of non-locality it is probably best understood of as a dream for it has the same properties.

What this seems to imply is that the entire universe is a mental construct and exists purely in a psychological gestalt, for within a psychological gestalt, space, dimensions and time are all constructs.

https://www.gestaltreality.com/articles ... -universe/

The idea that a non-local Universe would be like a dream or illusion might be invalid, but it shows that reality would be perceived as other than a world in which causality is a certainty.

It shows a door to a different world. A world that lays beyond logic and knowledge (that precedes it when seen from a fundamental perspective).


mystical-door-beyond-knowledge.jpg


It seems that philosophers and scientists have predicted that at some point in time, humans should start exploring that 'other' world. A world of meaning that is not 'repeatable'.

"Within Western philosophy, the realm beyond space has traditionally been considered a realm beyond physics — the plane of God’s existence in Christian theology. In the early eighteenth century, Gottfried Leibniz’s “monads” — which he imagined to be the primitive elements of the universe — existed, like God, outside space and time. His theory was a step toward emergent space-time, but it was still metaphysical, with only a vague connection to the world of concrete things.

Albert Einstein foresaw these difficulties. “Perhaps... we must also give up, by principle, the space-time continuum,” he wrote. “It is not unimaginable that human ingenuity will some day find methods which will make it possible to proceed along such a path. At the present time, however, such a program looks like an attempt to breathe in empty space.


https://gizmodo.com/a-new-way-of-thinki ... 1741498475
snt!

Yep, thank you for pointing that out...! Indeed very germane to the subject matter. There is something very transcendental, noumenal, or otherwise metaphysical about things-in-themselves (why we instinctively intuit 'all events must have a cause', etc.), which are beyond both the a priori fixed nature of self-consciousness, and the a posteriori aspects of causation itself.

Whether it's the phenomena such a the Higgs/Boson God particle, quantum tunneling, backwards causation, or phenomena as discovered in Wheeler's infamous PAP experiments, non-locality suggests (at the very least) that philosophically, 'The World as Will' seems to be alive and well... .

Thanks again snt! It's reassuring to see there are other philosophers that have that level of commitment to not only the concept of causation, but to both the corresponding discovery and uncovery of Being. To that end, I may do a separate thread on the Will; philosophically/metaphysically, that which breathes fire into the Hawking's equation's. I'm inspired to do a thread on that because the concepts of non-locality speak to much of the foregoing, as well the essence of causation (the concept) itself. I'll check the search button to see if it's been done before...

Non-locality/action at a distance: the concept that an object can be moved, changed, or otherwise affected without being physically touched (as in mechanical contact) by another object. That is, it is the non-local interaction of objects that are separated in space.

It seems as though consciousness, and one's will or decision to participate in some-thing, actually causes other unexpected things to happen... . Another sense of humanistic relativity.
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

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