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 »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 2:23 pm No, I don't understand the difference. That's part of what I've been asking you(?)

Please share those differences if you are able.
Yeah right, people aren't that stupid. Anyway here's a lottery example, you are playing the lottery, you have a 1 in 1000 chance of winning.

1. You don't believe that you will win next week, but you don't exclude the possibility.
2. You know it for a fact that you won't win next week.

But if you really don't see a difference then I don't know what to say.
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 »

Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 1:49 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 1:42 pm
Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 1:14 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 1:05 pm

Now you've flip-flopped, again. Before you said you didn't have a belief, now you're implying (the dictionary meaning) that your belief is based on a God that doesn't exist?
Where was God mentioned in "most atheists don't think that there isn't anything"?
We can keep playing, it's ok:

God is mentioned in the definition of Atheism, no?
Yes, which is relevant to "most atheists don't think that there isn't anything" how? You can't hold a line of thought which you yourself started?
To help assist you, please think carefully to the propositions/definitions before responding :

You are an Atheist who doesn't believe in a God or gods.

You believe that cause and effect lacks common sense (your quote, it's: "inherently illogical").

To help further with the definition:

Atheism: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
“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
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 23rd, 2022, 2:38 pm
Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 1:49 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 1:42 pm
Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 1:14 pm
Where was God mentioned in "most atheists don't think that there isn't anything"?
We can keep playing, it's ok:

God is mentioned in the definition of Atheism, no?
Yes, which is relevant to "most atheists don't think that there isn't anything" how? You can't hold a line of thought which you yourself started?
To help assist you, please think carefully to the propositions/definitions before responding :

You are an Atheist who doesn't believe in a God or gods.

You believe that cause and effect lacks common sense (your quote, it's: "inherently illogical").

To help further with the definition:

Atheism: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
No, for the nth time: I said cause and effect AS NORMALLY UNDERSTOOD is inherently illogical. Which I then explained in more detail.
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 »

Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 2:43 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 2:38 pm
Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 1:49 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 1:42 pm

We can keep playing, it's ok:

God is mentioned in the definition of Atheism, no?
Yes, which is relevant to "most atheists don't think that there isn't anything" how? You can't hold a line of thought which you yourself started?
To help assist you, please think carefully to the propositions/definitions before responding :

You are an Atheist who doesn't believe in a God or gods.

You believe that cause and effect lacks common sense (your quote, it's: "inherently illogical").

To help further with the definition:

Atheism: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
No, for the nth time: I said cause and effect AS NORMALLY UNDERSTOOD is inherently illogical. Which I then explained in more detail.

Please provide a level of detail that is cogent/coherent, explaining how cause and effect is "normally" as well as universally understood..
“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
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 23rd, 2022, 2:52 pm
Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 2:43 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 2:38 pm
Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 1:49 pm
Yes, which is relevant to "most atheists don't think that there isn't anything" how? You can't hold a line of thought which you yourself started?
To help assist you, please think carefully to the propositions/definitions before responding :

You are an Atheist who doesn't believe in a God or gods.

You believe that cause and effect lacks common sense (your quote, it's: "inherently illogical").

To help further with the definition:

Atheism: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
No, for the nth time: I said cause and effect AS NORMALLY UNDERSTOOD is inherently illogical. Which I then explained in more detail.

Please provide a level of detail that is cogent/coherent, explaining how cause and effect is "normally" as well as universally understood..
Again? There is cause and effect, but not how you imagine it.

We divide the indivisible universe into separate things. We now believe that there are all these separate objects.

We also divide the indivisible universe in time, into moments that follow in linear succession. We now believe that we literally have a universal flow of time from the past towards the future.

Now that we have these two inherently illogical ideas, we can come up with an inherently illogical version of cause and effect. There are separate things causing other separate things, while we are moving forward in time.

And then the theist has a genius insight: but wait, if we go back all the way, there had to be a first cause, no? After all we have an absolute flow of time from past towards future. Oh I know.. the first cause was God!

Give me a break..
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 »

Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 3:00 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 2:52 pm
Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 2:43 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 2:38 pm

To help assist you, please think carefully to the propositions/definitions before responding :

You are an Atheist who doesn't believe in a God or gods.

You believe that cause and effect lacks common sense (your quote, it's: "inherently illogical").

To help further with the definition:

Atheism: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
No, for the nth time: I said cause and effect AS NORMALLY UNDERSTOOD is inherently illogical. Which I then explained in more detail.

Please provide a level of detail that is cogent/coherent, explaining how cause and effect is "normally" as well as universally understood..
Again? There is cause and effect, but not how you imagine it.

We divide the indivisible universe into separate things. We now believe that there are all these separate objects.

We also divide the indivisible universe in time, into moments that follow in linear succession. We now believe that we literally have a universal flow of time from the past towards the future.

Now that we have these two inherently illogical ideas, we can come up with an inherently illogical version of cause and effect. There are separate things causing other separate things, while we are moving forward in time.

And then the theist has a genius insight: but wait, if we go back all the way, there had to be a first cause, no? After all we have an absolute flow of time from past towards future. Oh I know.. the first cause was God!

Give me a break..
Oh my, what is illogical about that? What are "inherently illogical ideas"? Please provide more detail (I'll keep that as a sort of subject-line so we don't loose sight of that question). RE: inherently illogical ideas. And you can explain when ever you are ready.

Anyway, please don't take this the wrong way, it's as if you know nothing about the basics. You seem to be inferring some sort of mind-body problem, not sure. Let's start with the basics, shall we? Then we'll get back to "things" that you might think are illogical, your Atheism belief, and so forth.

Generally speaking, cause and effect means that things happen because something prompted them to happen. A cause is why something happens. In a cause and effect relationship, one or more things happen as a result of something else. A cause is a catalyst, a motive, or an action that brings about a reaction—or reactions. A cause instigates an effect. An effect is a condition, occurrence, or result generated by one or more causes. Effects are outcomes.

Before we get to science/physics, so far, do we have agreement?
“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
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 23rd, 2022, 3:44 pm Oh my, what is illogical about that? What are "inherently illogical ideas"? Please provide more detail (I'll keep that as a sort of subject-line so we don't loose sight of that question). RE: inherently illogical ideas. And you can explain when ever you are ready.

Anyway, please don't take this the wrong way, it's as if you know nothing about the basics. You seem to be inferring some sort of mind-body problem, not sure. Let's start with the basics, shall we? Then we'll get back to "things" that you might think are illogical, your Atheism belief, and so forth.

Generally speaking, cause and effect means that things happen because something prompted them to happen. A cause is why something happens. In a cause and effect relationship, one or more things happen as a result of something else. A cause is a catalyst, a motive, or an action that brings about a reaction—or reactions. A cause instigates an effect. An effect is a condition, occurrence, or result generated by one or more causes. Effects are outcomes.

Before we get to science/physics, so far, do we have agreement?
Okay, let's see how far we get with this neat Kantian/Newtonian understanding of the "basics". I agree that what you wrote is how cause and effect is normally used, carry on.
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 »

Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 4:02 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 3:44 pm Oh my, what is illogical about that? What are "inherently illogical ideas"? Please provide more detail (I'll keep that as a sort of subject-line so we don't loose sight of that question). RE: inherently illogical ideas. And you can explain when ever you are ready.

Anyway, please don't take this the wrong way, it's as if you know nothing about the basics. You seem to be inferring some sort of mind-body problem, not sure. Let's start with the basics, shall we? Then we'll get back to "things" that you might think are illogical, your Atheism belief, and so forth.

Generally speaking, cause and effect means that things happen because something prompted them to happen. A cause is why something happens. In a cause and effect relationship, one or more things happen as a result of something else. A cause is a catalyst, a motive, or an action that brings about a reaction—or reactions. A cause instigates an effect. An effect is a condition, occurrence, or result generated by one or more causes. Effects are outcomes.

Before we get to science/physics, so far, do we have agreement?
Okay, let's see how far we get with this neat Kantian/Newtonian understanding of the "basics". I agree that what you wrote is how cause and effect is normally used, carry on.
Great! Now, explain why you think you agree with me that cause and effect, in and of itself, is...well, logical? You said it wasn't. Think carefully before you answer. We are only talking the basic's here of the logic behind most all causes and effects.

In short, explain how that is illogical.
“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
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, 7:58 am
Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 4:02 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 3:44 pm Oh my, what is illogical about that? What are "inherently illogical ideas"? Please provide more detail (I'll keep that as a sort of subject-line so we don't loose sight of that question). RE: inherently illogical ideas. And you can explain when ever you are ready.

Anyway, please don't take this the wrong way, it's as if you know nothing about the basics. You seem to be inferring some sort of mind-body problem, not sure. Let's start with the basics, shall we? Then we'll get back to "things" that you might think are illogical, your Atheism belief, and so forth.

Generally speaking, cause and effect means that things happen because something prompted them to happen. A cause is why something happens. In a cause and effect relationship, one or more things happen as a result of something else. A cause is a catalyst, a motive, or an action that brings about a reaction—or reactions. A cause instigates an effect. An effect is a condition, occurrence, or result generated by one or more causes. Effects are outcomes.

Before we get to science/physics, so far, do we have agreement?
Okay, let's see how far we get with this neat Kantian/Newtonian understanding of the "basics". I agree that what you wrote is how cause and effect is normally used, carry on.
Great! Now, explain why you think you agree with me that cause and effect, in and of itself, is...well, logical? You said it wasn't. Think carefully before you answer. We are only talking the basic's here of the logic behind most all causes and effects.

In short, explain how that is illogical.
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.
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 23rd, 2022, 3:44 pmGenerally speaking, cause and effect means that things happen because something prompted them to happen. A cause is why something happens. In a cause and effect relationship, one or more things happen as a result of something else. A cause is a catalyst, a motive, or an action that brings about a reaction—or reactions. A cause instigates an effect. An effect is a condition, occurrence, or result generated by one or more causes. Effects are outcomes.

Before we get to science/physics, so far, do we have agreement?
What would be the ground for any certainty in what you have described? The assertion is based on the idea that facts have a certain qualitative nature that makes them different from propositional truths which is a questionable idea.

There is evidence that consciousness can exert a physical effect backwards in time - on physical 'reality' in the past. How would that relate to causality when effects as they had 'appear' to be, prove to have been (able to been) otherwise?

Scientists introduce new cosmic connectivity: 🕊️ Quantum pigeonhole paradox
"With the new kind of quantum linkages which we have introduced, the particles don't have to interact in the past. In fact, they have no idea that the other particle even existed," said Jeff Tollaksen, Director of the Institute for Quantum Studies at Chapman University.

Aharonov found that Nature gains something very beautiful and exciting with this indeterminism: the present is not only affected by the past but it is also affected by the future. That is, the future (also known as post-selection) can come back to the present (like in the movie "Back to the Future").

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 132526.htm
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 »

Atla wrote: June 24th, 2022, 10:16 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 7:58 am
Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 4:02 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 3:44 pm Oh my, what is illogical about that? What are "inherently illogical ideas"? Please provide more detail (I'll keep that as a sort of subject-line so we don't loose sight of that question). RE: inherently illogical ideas. And you can explain when ever you are ready.

Anyway, please don't take this the wrong way, it's as if you know nothing about the basics. You seem to be inferring some sort of mind-body problem, not sure. Let's start with the basics, shall we? Then we'll get back to "things" that you might think are illogical, your Atheism belief, and so forth.

Generally speaking, cause and effect means that things happen because something prompted them to happen. A cause is why something happens. In a cause and effect relationship, one or more things happen as a result of something else. A cause is a catalyst, a motive, or an action that brings about a reaction—or reactions. A cause instigates an effect. An effect is a condition, occurrence, or result generated by one or more causes. Effects are outcomes.

Before we get to science/physics, so far, do we have agreement?
Okay, let's see how far we get with this neat Kantian/Newtonian understanding of the "basics". I agree that what you wrote is how cause and effect is normally used, carry on.
Great! Now, explain why you think you agree with me that cause and effect, in and of itself, is...well, logical? You said it wasn't. Think carefully before you answer. We are only talking the basic's here of the logic behind most all causes and effects.

In short, explain how that is illogical.
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.
“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
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, 11:14 am
Atla wrote: June 24th, 2022, 10:16 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 7:58 am
Atla wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 4:02 pm
Okay, let's see how far we get with this neat Kantian/Newtonian understanding of the "basics". I agree that what you wrote is how cause and effect is normally used, carry on.
Great! Now, explain why you think you agree with me that cause and effect, in and of itself, is...well, logical? You said it wasn't. Think carefully before you answer. We are only talking the basic's here of the logic behind most all causes and effects.

In short, explain how that is illogical.
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.
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8384
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, 11:40 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 11:14 am
Atla wrote: June 24th, 2022, 10:16 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 24th, 2022, 7:58 am

Great! Now, explain why you think you agree with me that cause and effect, in and of itself, is...well, logical? You said it wasn't. Think carefully before you answer. We are only talking the basic's here of the logic behind most all causes and effects.

In short, explain how that is illogical.
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... 😐
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
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, 11:02 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 23rd, 2022, 3:44 pmGenerally speaking, cause and effect means that things happen because something prompted them to happen. A cause is why something happens. In a cause and effect relationship, one or more things happen as a result of something else. A cause is a catalyst, a motive, or an action that brings about a reaction—or reactions. A cause instigates an effect. An effect is a condition, occurrence, or result generated by one or more causes. Effects are outcomes.

Before we get to science/physics, so far, do we have agreement?
What would be the ground for any certainty in what you have described? The assertion is based on the idea that facts have a certain qualitative nature that makes them different from propositional truths which is a questionable idea.

There is evidence that consciousness can exert a physical effect backwards in time - on physical 'reality' in the past. How would that relate to causality when effects as they had 'appear' to be, prove to have been (able to been) otherwise?

Scientists introduce new cosmic connectivity: 🕊️ Quantum pigeonhole paradox
"With the new kind of quantum linkages which we have introduced, the particles don't have to interact in the past. In fact, they have no idea that the other particle even existed," said Jeff Tollaksen, Director of the Institute for Quantum Studies at Chapman University.

Aharonov found that Nature gains something very beautiful and exciting with this indeterminism: the present is not only affected by the past but it is also affected by the future. That is, the future (also known as post-selection) can come back to the present (like in the movie "Back to the Future").

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 132526.htm
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.

In 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 (?).


With 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... .

Nonetheless, 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?
“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
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

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

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

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... 😐
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.
“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