>>11318633>You can't seem to acknowledge that "neurons firing" IS A PERCEPTION OF YOURS, IDIOT.Where did I say anything to the contrary? It's a non sequitur.
>Your sacred matter cannot be, for you, more than just an abstraction of your perceptions.An "abstraction of your perceptions" describes any model, so what?
>Perception or experience is primary with respect to matter.No, it's the other way around.
>Science is not at war with philosophy but grounded in it.I never said science was at war with philosophy. They aren't in conflict unless you are claiming your philosophy represents something real without scientific evidence. Which is what you or whoever
>>11318566 is did.
>>11318642>All empirical evidence of objective reality comes through subjective experience. We have no direct experience with objective reality. Subjective experience is primary.Doesn't follow. The former would be true regardless of whether matter or subjective experience is primary.
>Where do you get this idea that philosophy is somehow at odds with science?Where did you get that idea from what I said? I think it's pretty clear they are not at odds when one is concerned with correlations with reality while the other is not. It's like saying science is at odds with math. They aren't trying to do the same thing, so they aren't in conflict.
It's funny how you both completely failed to understand what I've said. Maybe you need to work on your philosophy.
