From: nospam@example.net   
      
   On Tue, 11 Mar 2025, oldernow wrote:   
      
   > On 2025-03-11, D  wrote:   
   >   
   >>> Empiricism: yet another religion.   
   >>>   
   >>> How so?   
   >>>   
   >>> Because adherent faith makes it seemingly real to its   
   >>> adherents.   
   >>   
   >> Incorrect.   
   >   
   > You forgot the rest of the sentence, which is: "in the   
   > context of my faith".   
      
   Maybe we should backup and start again? Also, what does the context of   
   your faith mean?   
      
   >> I always challenge people who think empiricism is a   
   >> religion to jump off a roof, since obviously there is   
   >> no external reality or laws discovered by empirical   
   >> investigations of the external world   
   >   
   > Positing an external world and its laws, and then   
   > being surprised that it works in accord with one's   
   > faith regardless how deeply one looks is merely an   
   > investigation into the power of faith.   
      
   There is no positing. It is just action. If faith is so powerful, no one   
   should be afraid. This is a self-contradiction.   
      
   > But it says nothing about any underlying .   
      
   It sure does. G.E. Moores, Here's a hand is excellent proof of the   
   external world. As is the success of science, the fact that things remain   
   where they are and countless other proofs.   
      
   By doubting that, your position collapses into solipsism.   
      
   >> Of all the people I have met who do not believe in an external world, no   
   >> one has ever taken the challenge, thereby proving that they do in fact,   
   >> for all intents and purposes, act as if there is an external reality.   
   >   
   > Not jumping ("act") doesn't prove there's an external   
   > world: it proves one *believes* ("as if") there's an   
   > external world,   
      
   That explains nothing and just adds another complication, it is therefore   
   redundant. It opens oneup to beliving the belief in the world and belief   
   in belief in belief in the world.   
      
   >> Since their behaviour in every single way indicates there is an external   
   >> reality, this is, in fact what they believe and should drop any other   
   >> ideas.   
   >   
   > Reality to an individual is never not in   
   > accord with what they believe it to be, for   
   > that's all it could ever be in/to their isolated   
   > conceptuality/representational/modeling context, aka   
   > "mind".   
   >   
   > What is often called "reality" is indistinguishable from   
   > "dreaming plus the belief one isn't merely dreaming".   
      
   Let's reframe it. Can you falsify the world? Can you shove me one single   
   proof that it does not exist or that the world is mind?   
      
   The fact that you are arguing also proves that at a deep level you do   
   acknowledge the external world, so it is yet another way in which you   
   refute your own position.   
      
   >> Theres is then of course the ultimate argument that reality exists   
   >> regardless of their attitude to it. They have no choice but to exist in   
   >> external reality, short of suicide. So reality and empiricism does not   
   >> imply belief. It just is. I can act freely in the external world, without   
   >> any beliefs. That is why we know it is true.   
   >>   
   >> Then we can argue about the ultimate nature, but this, as material,   
   >> beings, we will never know for sure.   
   >   
   > Because "knowing" is faith plus the belief that what is   
   > known is not "merely" one's faith.   
      
   This is the theory of truth, this is another question. Truth does not   
   exist outside the human mind. It is a process that happens when the mind   
   experiences the external world.   
      
   Without an external world, truth more or less collapses.   
      
   > Perhaps there's some underlying reality to experience. But   
   > as soon as one says it "is" ,   
   > one has stepped into a world of faith, because faith   
   > defines is-ness in/to an individuality context.   
      
   Nope. It is a fact. Planet earth is. If you cannot falsify that   
   statement, it is the truth. If you falsify it, by all means, I'll change   
   my mind. ;)   
      
   > Said another way, the belief in being an individual demands   
   > auxiliary beliefs about its context/container to seemingly   
   > "make sense" of the individuality belief. But that doesn't   
   > mean the posited individual and its context/container   
   > exist separately.   
      
   This makes no sense to me. I'm talking about the external world, and I   
   still see no way you have falsified the existence of material reality,   
   therefore I can only conclude you are talking nonsense. ;)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)