Initially written in a comment to +Eric Bright and asked for a separate post.

We seem to have a common interest, where I'm taking the philosophy of mind approach to show that religion has always been about psychology and education. As with any other topic, this one in particular it's not easy to find dialogue where others genuinely follow and engage in intelligent conversation. As for religion, polytheist religion according to me is mostly about naming cognitive functions, describe what they are like and how they relate to others; mystifying these things I think is a consequence of the written language where non-verbal conveyance is not involved.

And it is a cogent premisee for discourse if followed.
It served a function, and one may be free to argue for example that entertainment is a more leading principle as that is much more common in informal conversation. But I wager that the best entertainment in poetry and art does play with intuition and emotion at that level and is a grounding feature of whether an idea or story spread easily or not irrespective of current relevance.

By adding the above, I somehow verged more into metaphysics, ontology and epistemology. Hope the category can be changed to reflect eventual interest.
But hoping to keep the category and perhaps even elaborations on Qualia in creative form can show up. Realistically however this is likely to lead onto basic principles behind Memes, intuition pumps and the like.
Epistemology, for what are we talking about -- and please do!

This is a rather uncharted and controversial subject so feel free to offer lots of insights that aren't documented by "reputable scientist #45."

There are many people who grow up being sane and sensible. They live free of mental illness. They begin studying religion, meditation, self cultivation, the occult, various subjects otherwise, and become highly intelligent. They develop a form of what most would describe as schizophrenia in which they perceive religious and spiritual happenings. Ironically if you encourage them to try other religions out they often will still experience religion and spirituality except they will experience different kinds.

It leads a lot of people to wonder what is spirituality in reference to the mind? Is it brought on illness by misdirected knowledge? Or is it just a natural part of human development when they investigate things that are greater than themselves to develop a "spiritual" aspects of themselves.

My personal thought is that spirituality is a natural development however needs to be dealt with carefully as it is neurochemical in nature. It is possible to get too much of a good thing. I consider myself an Atheist as I have experienced many religious perspectives and learned that these are just passing perspectives of the mind. I continue to experience spirituality regardless of belief. I've learned to use it for a soothing effect rather than to get upset about it normally.

How many times a day, during normal social interaction, can you hear someone saying:

"So, what's the problem?"

I wonder how many of you hear:

"So, what's the solution?" (to the problem).

The first question might bring loads of negativity and false judgement of "problem" where the latter brings much more positive word associations in: eg there is hope :)

Puts u straight away in a better state of mind :)

I open my first philosophy topic.

I took time to open fist topic, because i wanted to improve my ability to do a correct esposition my thoughts in english.

Question is about the persistence of the condition of freedom in an enviroment without the paradigma of free will.

I'm not really intrested the moral or ethic vision of free will, that is surelly intresting, but the logic and rational consequence choise to not considerate it in the social model of freedom.

Theory behind this sentence is that we can't easy demostrate existence of free will as well of existence of concept of natural right (two phenomenum that are probably connected). but i think we can demostrate that without the paradigma of free will we can't have freedom, we have something different with the same name (i coudl add that without natural right you can't have a natural dignity as human being)

I personally find intresting argoument, and i was thinking to write something about (i'm working on a song), for 3 main reasons:

1) orign and evolution meaning of freedom coudl be associate to the specific evolution of concept of free will if they are in some way correlate, in this case we have a point of connection to exit the loop where end the abstractions out of history

2) there is a inverse tendency to increase concept of freedom in absence of free will, that if is in contraddiction and in paradox factor, it mean you are increasing something else with the wrong name

3) rethink the way we connect freedom to a new and modern rational defintion of free will (it mean artificial, do by the law, at this point), open new ways for the evolution of civil rights that are not associate directly a difficult to define (without elements that shape it) and relativistic concept of freedom, but the necessity to wirte laws about your right to experience a real free will, and about conditions necessary that allow you right to real chose main point fo existentialism.

Thank listen me.

Be careful what you look for, you may just find it.

With so much misinformation and schools of thought, personal ideology plays a role in the references we are willing to accept. And if you can't google it, try try again.


How does one commit to a postulate of truth if they have been brought up on falsities? How can you tell if empirical evidence does not just agree with you because you want it to?

"Impermanence is one of the essential doctrines or three marks of existence in Buddhism. The term expresses the Buddhist notion that all of conditioned existence, without exception, is transient, or in a constant state of flux."

Really felt this last night in meditation as this brilliant white light filled my mind and pounded with the sound of each heartbeat.

How in philosophy one mind and one soul are accommodated in one brain, feelings versus logic.

What makes artificial intelligence artificial. Is intelligence tainted by its source?

If someone is put under shock therapy to rearrange their neurons exactly like my own, would they have all of the mental aspects of me?

It struck me as funny. Without my glasses, "I cannot see anything." I thought I saw my cat on my bed, but my mind was playing tricks on me. The phrase wouldn't be I cannot see anything, but rather I thought I could see more than I could.