Your philosophical views

Post Reply New Topic

I subscribe to a physicalistic or naturalistic metaphysics, I do not believe in god or other supernatural entities or phenomena. I am a nominalist in that I think abstractions and concepts are merely tools to help us understand the world, they do not have any existance outside the electrochemical activity inside our brains or some symbolic translation of those mental processes in the form of written language or other media. The only things that exist are elementary particles and their associated quantum fields and processes (such as stars, planets, life, societies, brains, etc) ultimately based on the interactions of those elementary particles. I am a variety of determinist, a variety which I call modal determinism, which is is based on the "many worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics.

I adhere to a variant of Karl Popper's falsificationst epistemology, my main disagreement with Popper is that I somewhat agree with logical positivist thinkers that the meanings of propositions is also important to a degree (Popper consider the issue of meaning as unimportant). I believe that since we are finite, fallible beings we cannot know the true nature of reality with absolute certainty, but we can create better and better approximations of reality, which we call scientific theories, through creating and testing falsifiable hypotheses and applying those scientific theories via technology and social policy.

My ethics is that of negitive utilitarianism, the morally right thing for individuals to do is to do things that reduce the amount of suffering in society. Ethics must be intimately connected to the problems of actual people and societies.

I am a monotheist in that I think a deity created everything and currently exists as a deity. I tend to believe in predestination, that things were preordained to work the way that they do.

My epistemology tends towards rationalism. I see logic as inherently the foundation of knowledge, however, I have a lot of skepticism towards any knowledge as logic requires foundational premises and I don't see any premises that must be accepted as true. This skepticism leads me to the belief that even though logic is the basis of truth, everyone accepts premises and some premises are right and others are wrong but there is no way for human beings to necessarily distinguish between the 2 of them.

My ethics is deontological. The right thing to do is to serve the deity because that is the only way I see ethics as working. Technically, I only believe in this ethics because of faith. I really don't believe in any other ethics because of the fact that they seem to be very sloppy additions to the systems put in place, as can be seen from my perspective with the number of reductionists who do not reduce away morals. I think that without the notion of a morality giver that there are only 2 reasonably consistent systems of action: no action because there are no actions that ought to be taken, or egoist action because the self is the only thing known and can relatively easily be seen as having inherent value.

personally I feel theres too little data for me to know how the world was created. I do not believe in the current scientific theory of creation though. I know there was some assistance and I do believe in paranormal happenings. I don't believe in predestination but then again I don't believe in completely free will I think we have multiple paths before us but due to our free will everything is conditional and nothing is completely preordained in that sense. I don't know but judging from the post above

I think I believe in egotist but in a way that is moral to I don't harm or put down people and I seek for everyone to feel their individuality is apperciated but I believe that the only variable I can control is me. I seek to make small changes as much as possible because I believe the ripple effect has a small concentrated effect which have deeper world wide effects due to how much people migrate. I also believe in the concept of individual reality in which we are responible for our reality if we believe the world sucks its a reflection of needing to work on ourselves and change it to what it should be.

I also believe in the fact that humans are all born with the same potential for happiness and furfilling their dreams but since that path is harder many don't believe in themselves to do what is nesscary to achieve that. i'm sorry the labels in here are estimations as I don't keep up with the titles for these movements. If anyone knows the titles though I'd love to hear them

Objectivist

Metaphysics: Objective Reality.
Epistemology: Reason.
Ethics: Self-interest.
Politics: Capitalism.

So Abangyarudo, I would guess that you are an agnostic but not a reductionist. The former because you don't know, and the latter because you are not willing to discount hypotheses that seem less necessary to you. You may be a bit of a mystic given that you seem to believe in a world beyond pure rationality and empiricism but not within the confines of a current theory. I don't know what you would call your idea on free will, but "Choose your own adventure" libertarian sounds like a good name as you are a libertarian in terms of the relationship between the future and free will. Odin might have a better term.

I call myself preordained because I do not argue a future determined by the past but rather one determined by a deity and thus things are determined but I did not want to just say "determinism" because people will immediately think of materialist determinism.

You are an egoist who follows the inverted Golden rule(do not do to others as you would not have them do to you) but you also say that individuality has absolute value. I guess you may also be perceived as having a good amount of agency, which is sort of a social view but partially philosophical. People make the environment. I am not sure whether individual reality is just a reaffirmation that individuals change the world, or if it is a statement of subjective reality where by simply thinking or perceiving I change reality itself.

In terms of mankind you seem to believe in equality of potential or opportunity, but not of life. I dunno, I think that I just reiterated your terms in something more advanced sounding.

Half of me thinks that there is an equal but opposite universe which controls everything here...

Half of me thinks that we are all just thoughts in a sleeping persons dream

Half of me thinks that we are extremely slow moving gases with a purpose

Half of me thinks that if this is evolution, I hope it's not finished

Half of me thinks if this is creation, I hope it's not finished

Half of me thinks that my halves don't add up

this is my philosophy

Don't f with me.
Don't sell me men on crosses.
Don't f with the trees.
Don't f with the animals.
Don't f with the kids.

Have a nice day.

Everything (the world, morality) is exactly as I believe it to be because I have perceived it to be thus and there is no higher authority to which I can appeal.

Either the failure to believe a proposition creates friction and or barriers to action, or its truth value in conversation between individuals is undefined.

There is, however, an objective reality, in which math statements, scientific propositions, and even philosophical propositions are true. This is nice to talk about, and each individual must consider himself in possession of certain true principles, but if two people don't agree on the issue, it doesn't matter because these propositions are outside the domain of reason.

Actions are right/wrong in themselves, but I do not believe there is any clear cut way of identifying the moral value to them. In general, I am more inclined than average to egoism and a love of accomplishment. I worship greatness in all the forms in which it can manifest itself, all ways in which we push the boundaries of being human.

Politics should be based on rights.
The measure of a society has nothing to do with quality of life of its inhabitants. It has to do with what that society accomplished in art, science, etc.

Unsure about God.

I am agnostic, former christian, which I think of the possibility of God or a deity, although not sure how, if a group of laws governing the universe which would seen as intelligence, kinda like the force or actually an intelligent being, or perhaps the result of human imagination and hopes, I am in a state of doubt about this.