> would you bother to start to provide even some kind of perfunctory answer to it? i think it's obvious there is a binary here: reality is either intentional, or it is not. xor. i have considered the position of no intentionality to the best of my meager ability, and found that it is not a tenable position, in that eventually, the argument becomes circular or otherwise collapses in upon itself. so i am convinced there is intentionality. the next obvious question is then determinism. that's an open question that has more support, but it seems foolish to accept the position that no randomness is involved, because nothing indicates the opposite to be overwhelmingly true. so if we are to assume an intentional and non-deterministic reality, it seems thus ridiculous to assume that consciousness is merely a functional thing. just my opinion, though, as one who knows barely anything in the grand scheme of it all.   possibly. i think jesus was a great philosopher and i heed his message.   > one thing i know for sure is that non-existence is an unstable condition we have no capacity to understand non-existence in the first place. it is obviously incompatible with existence, that is certain, so sure, i agree from the perspective of an existing consciousness.
United States