Spontaneous Philosophy

The hard problem of consciousness. Is an infant subjectively aware? Can love be a non-conscious relation? How is it that we unwittingly project a mind or 'personhood' into other creatures, including infants; is this projection accurate? Why is 'vantage perception' a better name than 'theory of mind'?

In this episode we consider the nature of free speech, reflecting on some of the ideas of John Locke. I look at the First Amendment of the US Constitution (and as I type this I now remember that I forgot to look at the 5th Amendment! Really wanted to explore what that was all about -- have only seen it on films etc. :) Oh, I also explain my theory/brief observation about the nature of honesty in discourse. Thanks for listening Hope you enjoy B

Hello! Our first spontaneous philosophical discussion of the very heart of ideas, science, and logic themselves: consciousness. In this first episode I read and converse on passages from Nietzsche and Wittgenstein (philosophers), as well as Dr Rita Carter (neuroscientist). I also, in the first part, present my own Philosophy of Mind, a description of how perceptual creatures move through developmental stages towards having (an experiential, subjective, private) consciousness. Thank you for listening, and hope you enjoy :)

In this spontaneous episode, I discuss the Problem of Evil/Suffering -- that is, the argument against the existence of God/gods due to the undeniable existence of suffering in our world. I think through the nature and logic of suffering itself, distinguishing it from pain, and placing it in relation to conscious volition. Finally, I talk through the Free-Will theodicy (solution to the Problem of Suffering), and then give my own theodicy from a non-religious or non-theological starting point. Thanks for listening, and merry Christmas :)

In this, the first ever episode of 'Spontaneous Philosophy', I discuss the nature of consciousness in a largely unplanned, tangential, but technical way.  Oh, and I talk about a strange dream I had about being INSIDE a Chinese dragon. Yes.  The ideas of Descartes, Goff, Avicenna, and others are touched upon and put to use, as well as the theory of consciousness that makes most sense to me.  Namely, that consciousness is a repetition of gaze perception, which is itself a structural repetition of vantage perception (aka the badly termed, 'theory of mind').  In other words, I take panpsychism to be wrong so far as supposing that all sufficiently complex systems of matter bear consciousness, while the hard problem of consciousness more likely concerns a qualitatively new 'event' in hitherto non-conscious processes (rocks, plants, etc.). This 'event' may be something like a self-informing 'coupling' (as termed in physics), where the very act of projecting a model of this self-information determines the fact of its reality -- something that had not yet had the opportunity to take place for less complex systems.  Be warned -- the above description is clearer than what happens in the podcast, sorry :) Welcome to spontaneity.   Thank you, and I hope some of this was of use x