[removed]

I dont think the universe wants anything. It just is, and by some random fluke life poped up

But what we all dont know, is consciousness

1. Really the end of it or is there something above consciousness that we cant grasp and understand? Like a „mindless“ bedbug will never be able to comprehend consciousness outside its limited brainfunctions.
2. really a winning trait. In the end maybe the „consciousness feeling“ is a loosing trait, destroys itself and goes back to „mindlesness“. Like in that episode of love death and robots.

I don't understand what they mean. All people are conflicted and self contradicting. So in that sense there is always fragmentation. If they don't mean that, then what?

“ If consciousness is fundamental and primary to all else, rather than an emergent property of complex matter, then, in a strange twist of fate, this would mirror many of the great religious teachings throughout the ages.”

I wouldn’t call it a strange twist. I think our history of religious teachings is the reason the idea has so much of a foothold in the first place. Just because we can imagine consciousness existing outside the brain does not give the theory any credence.

Or maybe neither. Consciousness could simply be the inwards reference frame.

Something akin to outwards reference frame yet having an opposite direction.

Nowhere, the same is true with any type of dualism like panpsychism, but it's also true with any type of monism like materialism or idealism. Ontology do be like that for now.

Okay, I feel "isolated" and I reject the "panpsychic nature of reality". Once again, where is the evidence that panpsychism is correct?

So they are saying to accept the fragmentation would make you a stronger person?

Mmm yes I concur.

Does anyone feel like consciousness isn't really a thing in itself? Like it's a necessary illusion created in the brain in order to be aware and accept information?

I was chatting recently with a friend about consciousness and the sense of self. I suggested that if we could go back in time to when he was born, and he was transported somewhere else, to another country and raised by a different family then maybe it would be the equivalent of a completely different person and consciousness (basically the same as if a different baby was born). It wouldn't be 'him growing up somewhere else', it would literally be an entirely different 'consciousness' and sense of self operating in that body.

It is amazing that when matter in the universe is left for long enough, it eventually creates a self aware object that wants to study itself and everything around it. What a crazy ride reality is.

Abstract: An important recent distinction in the empirical literature about self-control is between resisting and avoiding temptations.

While we have some evidence that avoiding temptations is the more efficient method of the two, philosophers have focused almost exclusively on resisting temptations.

The aim of this talk is to examine what the ability to avoid temptations depends on and argue that it depends primarily on how fragmented one’s mind is: on the inconsistencies in one’s mental setup.

The fragmentation of mind requires a significant amount of mental effort to conceal from oneself and this leads to a weakened ability to resist temptations.

Are you able to explicate what you mean by this “intelligence” a little more?

Consciousness is the universe looking back at itself! Always loved this quote. Why? Because if that's true then the universe itself want us to explore it.

Feeling isolated can have several possible causes: psychiatric or psychological disorder, personality disorder, ignorance or rejection of the panpsychic nature of reality, lack of physical interaction and connection with others (a basic human need), etc…

Regardless of my own personal beliefs I think it’s important to recognize that this question of the primacy of mind or matter is in fact a question of belief as there is no way (as of yet) to conclusively dismiss either theory.

This “problem” stands in reproach to the staunch materialist atheists who take such pride in being so purely logical and scientific (and by implication smarter & better). The simple fact is that their outlook is based on belief too.

So feeling of unity is the proof? But other people feel isolated. So which feeling is the right feeling when it comes to evidence for some form of panpsychism?

[removed]

Why are all human beings evil? Why are all human beings good?

The Nazis were not evil?

My post regarding the Philosophy of Alexander Dugin was unfortunately removed without comment for apparently not being about Philosophy 😢

Anyone else have this issue?

It seems to me you're equating personal gain with evil? Why?

>My substack argues that objective morality does exist (its wrong to torture babies for fun for example, regardless of one's own opinion).

It is immoral only if you value human life and consider causing suffering to humans immoral. Imagine an intelligent alien that holds that only aliens of its species have inherent value and everything else has value insofar as it effects the lives of other aliens. How could you convince him that his morality is "wrong"?

>The last section of asks whether you would force others to accept the utility coach. I even state: "My question is whether you would force other people to sign-up for the lifeplan." I'm not interested in one's personal choice, but how far this personal choice should be imposed onto others. If satisfaction is all you care about, then people would be obligated to force others to accept the utility coach's offer. However, I argue that people should be free to make their own decisions, regardless of the amount of welfare on the table. And this personal freedom is valuable beyond personal welfare. Its something to be respected for its own sake, and its fundamental to ethics.

The one you presented and the one I would be ok with are fundamentally different. The questions "would you force someone to maximise their personal happiness" and "would you force someone to increase the happiness of humans collectively" are incomparable. I think the second is moral, but in no way is it the same coach as the one you presented.

Great read- what do you think came first the chicken of matter or the egg of consciousness ?

directing efforts, at situations, earlier than the children

extensive effort on helping parenthood of children

extensive effort of educating on what results to children

extensive efforts of educating society of philosophy and right action