wordy

Agree with all exept this "while philosophy is more about acquisition of knowledge."

Are you sure they even care? I've looked at philosophy now for some 40 years and they seems to not care about knowledge at all. They only care for consistency within premises?

am I wrong. Which philospher care for knowledge. Maybe Dennett do it and The Churchlands but very few else among the publically known.

I could be wrong though- Maybe they all care about knowledge but are so caught up in the debate that they fail to express it. They care for the fight to be best at arguing but care almost nothing about knowledge. Dennett and Churchland couple are exceptions.

figuer

I can see your point. However, consistency within premises is an aspect of organising acquired knowledge. But I have no problem rephrasing the quote to: "while philosophy is more about establishing a relationship with knowledge".

wordy

Your a friendly guy.

I usually come through as a nitpicking moron I guess.

Some parts of philosophy love to tell how bad materialists are and they point out that methodological naturalism is ok AFAIK they accept that approach by science but get very mad at anybody saying that science result give evidence for metaphysical naturalism.

these philosophers seems to use philosophy against "reductive" materialism/physicalism or including metaphysical naturalism in that war against theReductionists and biologistic scientists and to me it look not so much to care about knowledge but to care about using philosphy for political purposes so

AFAIK
Philosophy and Religion share this track record. They both are used for political purposes and none of them has any tool for stopping that usage.

So I am still skeptical to both.

That doesn't mean I am into reductionism at all. But reduction as a scientific tool of gaining knowledge has been very successful and that is why it is so hated by the enemies of Physicalism.

I wish there was words that was non-philosophical or non-metaphysical to use instead of Physicalism cause the enemies pop up every time one say anything and they are very aggressive too.

Your a bright guy, what word to use. Ordinary word instead of materialism physicalism an naturalism, a word that doesn't make metaphysical claims.

A word that says something practical and functional and mean something but doesn't make claims needing philosophy.

woe, I looked for such words now since 1996 or so. I don't want to die without having an named identity. What am I. Atheist is saying nothing. It is a negation. Humanist claim too much. I'm not Bright either. Dim is a smear word.

Help me out please.

figuer

I have no problem with reductionism as an analytical tool, but humans don't respond well to it psychologically. Human psychology requires thus explanations that are religious/philosophical. There should be no contradiction or conflict, it is all a matter of understanding the provinces of action of each.

I don't know if such a word exists or can be possible. I have a word that captures some of the feeling; Immanent (derived from the Latin in manere "to remain within"):
• indwelling; inherent; all-pervading. immanence, n. http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/d.../d0006850.html
It has connotations that are physicalist, philosophical and theological:
• Something existing in the realm of the material universe and/or human consciousness. http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/th...mman-body.html
• ... refers to philosophical and metaphysical theories of the divine as existing and acting within the mind or the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanence

Thus: An Immanentist perhaps??

aupmanyav

What is inside as if outside is different?

wordy

Jay indeed to Immanentism or Immanism as I named it some days or weeks ago. I told Febble about it in her I am ateist thread.

Good suggestion Fiquer.

Would it work, have you written something more about it? Your much better

thinker than I am so I wait for your response before I muse my imagniation about immanentism.

Here is what American Heritage says about your word

But this is a metaphysical claim as I get it. I find it kind of useful for my kind of atheism though.

Give me more I like it

figuer

I think it implies that 'outside' is a quality of the 'inside', or: there is no outside the system, everything is a part of it.

Since immanence is a quality of Brahman I would suppose that you are an immanentist. Am I right?

figuer

Why?? Muse yourself to your heart's content.
But immanence is also physicalist, that is the beauty of the term:

• Something existing in the realm of the material universe and/or human consciousness.

aupmanyav

Brahman is all, inside as well as outside (which are same) and consists of atoms, strings, quantas, energy, or what ever science finds out, because there is nothing other than that. Am I an immanentist?

wordy

Damn, I am so incredibly naive. You mean that was what it meant? Why on earth didn't anybody tell me. I feel had or what the word is. Fooled into being a fool?

I'm no supporter of Hinduism. No offence aupmanyav.

Fiquer are you telling me your into Hinduism? ISCON or similar?

Wow when I finally find a word for my view it means the opposite to what I thought.

did they get how it could be read.

Hinduism is 180 degrees opposite to how I read it to mean.

Hinduism as I get it means that there is no world. So the text should have said the opposite.

the whole world and the individual is how deity, mind, or spirit express itself. It means the world doesn't exist. What exists is the Deity, All Mind, and All Spirit is only spirit. There is no world or individuals, it is a way for the Deity to express itself.

I am 100% opposed to such views.

Are you sure there is no immanentism that could be fully materialistic physicalist?