tadmjones
Regulars-
Posts
2087 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
49
tadmjones last won the day on March 19
tadmjones had the most liked content!
Profile Information
-
Gender
Male
Previous Fields
-
Sexual orientation
No Answer
-
Relationship status
No Answer
-
State (US/Canadian)
Not Specified
-
Country
United States
-
Copyright
Copyrighted
-
School or University
na
Recent Profile Visitors
tadmjones's Achievements
Senior Member (6/7)
217
Reputation
-
tadmjones reacted to a post in a topic: Microtubules, Quantum and Indeterminism
-
What does my mind need?
tadmjones replied to HowardRoarkSpaceDetective's topic in Metaphysics and Epistemology
Really, how so? -
What does my mind need?
tadmjones replied to HowardRoarkSpaceDetective's topic in Metaphysics and Epistemology
The poster evaluated an individual's self described self observation as an example of a proper result flowing from a proper application of principle, I was suggesting the poster more closely evaluate the source of the report of having achieved a paragon status of rationality. -
How is existence meaningful as an axiom?
tadmjones replied to 8g9's topic in Metaphysics and Epistemology
So volitional consciousness is the acme or apex of naturally occurring phenomenon, not 'outside' of nature? Your wording seems to leave open the possibility that cancer is evil, but I don't think that is what you intended to express. -
Objectivism: my fall from reason??
tadmjones replied to Ogg_Vorbis's topic in Questions about Objectivism
Theory is applied philosophy, science is a method to test a theory against reality. Premises are context, they may be incorrect against wider contexts, incongruent when integrated into a wider , or the widest context, but premises aren't/can't be 'out of context'. -
How is existence meaningful as an axiom?
tadmjones replied to 8g9's topic in Metaphysics and Epistemology
Nature has no good or evil , therefore morality is supranatural? -
Objectivism: my fall from reason??
tadmjones replied to Ogg_Vorbis's topic in Questions about Objectivism
Science is science and philosophy is philosophy. Scientists are guided/constrained by their metaphysics. Philosophers should be happy just being Kings, lol. -
Boydstun reacted to a post in a topic: Objectivism: my fall from reason??
-
Israelo-Palestinian Conflict: 2023 Edition
tadmjones replied to AlexL's topic in Terrorism and Islamic Fundamentalism
Maybe some recent state actors implemented the same trick, break a poorer nation’s stuff , force them to flee and settle in. -
Objectivism: my fall from reason??
tadmjones replied to Ogg_Vorbis's topic in Questions about Objectivism
The new guy’s syntax and complimentarianism feels chat bot-y. -
What does my mind need?
tadmjones replied to HowardRoarkSpaceDetective's topic in Metaphysics and Epistemology
Keep in mind the anecdotal nature of individual data points. -
How is existence meaningful as an axiom?
tadmjones replied to 8g9's topic in Metaphysics and Epistemology
6 Author Posted Tuesday at 07:09 PM Hello everyone. I know it sounds ridiculous but hear me me out if you will. How does Objectivism counter the proposition that existence is meaningless as an axiom. We know that it must be implicit in sense perception. We know existence cannot be derived from being the opposite of non-existence. Non-existence does not exist metaphysically, only epistemologically. We know existence can't be derived from being the opposite of mental delusion. Even the mind and everything in it exists. That is the question of reality in contrast to mind. We know existence can't be defined as it is a metaphysical primary. So where is it in sense perception? What makes it meaningful? I want to understand but I can't seem to answer it. From the OP , asking for explicit formulation of the ineffable, and me suggesting that a formulation will not be satisfactory unless the self is recognized as part of the ‘make up’ of the external world even when trying articulate a separation. -
How is existence meaningful as an axiom?
tadmjones replied to 8g9's topic in Metaphysics and Epistemology
So I should have said passive acceptance or recognition? ( I didn't use the word knowledge, so a little confused as to your point) -
How is existence meaningful as an axiom?
tadmjones replied to 8g9's topic in Metaphysics and Epistemology
The implicit acceptance or the recognition of the external world or reality comes from the mere physicality. The feeling of tactile response to solidity, bump into the door jam on the way out of the room, oh yeah solid stuff. Knock your coffee over on the counter, oh yeah that gravity so useful when causing my car to work on roads , but maybe a little too much and too always right here on the counter, lol. Even more implicit is your awareness of ‘it’. Even more implicit is that awareness is the most finite thing , the locus from which all of ‘it’ impinges toward or radiates from. Formulating an explicit statement that articulates the distinction and relationship between the most finite self and ‘everything’ that awareness is shown can be discombobulating. -
StrictlyLogical reacted to a post in a topic: My Ethical Theory and Rand's
-
tadmjones reacted to a post in a topic: My Ethical Theory and Rand's
-
Israelo-Palestinian Conflict: 2023 Edition
tadmjones replied to AlexL's topic in Terrorism and Islamic Fundamentalism
The name Palestine is basically a Roman bitch slap on top of a genocide of uppity Jews. -
tadmjones reacted to a post in a topic: My Ethical Theory and Rand's
-
tadmjones reacted to a post in a topic: Reblogged:Left 'White'-Washes Anti-Semitism
-
Since axiomatic concepts are identifications of irreducible primaries, the only way to define one is by means of an ostensive definition—e.g., to define “existence,” one would have to sweep one’s arm around and say: “I mean this.” Definitions Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, 41 If existence is/ has axiomatic primacy, then the 'this' being ostensibly defined by the sweeping of the arm are 'all' the objects of sense perception, so the 'cause' of the objects,no? What I am questioning is , is the awareness of 'this' , the experience 'as' fundamental at least equally fundamental that 'primacy' is somehow incorrect?