[Paestimer]

I don't know if I ever find a pleasing home already populated by potential philosophical partners of mine (people required to be accepting of my somewhat deceptively silly shorthand-expressions) here or anywhere else on the Internet.

But at least I keep probing - as if propelled by approximately such a (or roughly corresponding) purpose - to find such peers.

My problem is, firstly, that (or how) I have perversely formulated (or thus made concrete by concEPTs carefully contrived partly by method of "MAD"-inspired sem_antics - i.e., a method inspired in me partly by that very *nuclear arms race shaming* acronym for "mutual assured destruction") some simple but, presumably, seldom had insights (even perhaps one or two marginally unprecedented ones) into some aspects of Truth [="how things are", or IOW, "What Is (including was and will be) going on"] and that these aspects (though the most prominent aspect of which is a to people's evolution psychology and behavior pertaining truth; more specifically how we evolved to not be 'too keen' to understand, grasp, and pay analytical and explanatory (awareness annealing) "actention" to certain truths.

That is, I'm referring to having the temerity to be thinking about and coming to 'etymologically pioneering' terms with (or perversely philosophize in a philosophy-finalizing or 'effectively philosophy terminating' way about).

These are aspects of Truth that will tend to be painful (or overly onerous) unless perceived through protective lenses steeped in/coated with a special sort of humor (one that I call "SEPTIC humor" - the serious and conservative meaning of which is that it might approximately stand for something like "by science sufficiently solidly established principles, theories, corroborated conclusions (etcetera).


Secondly, by having observed, mostly only as a lurker, "physics insiders" locking horns, I have gained a 'surfacy' sort surety about the superiority of string/M-theory (amongst all other mathematical approaches and methods of thinking in the field of fundamental physics); and I have come to see that (as the mathematics of string theory suggests) an assumption of a sufficiently large quantity of "vacua" affords one to conclude that the only rational-philosophical (but not ultimately mathematical) explanation for what is going on is that What Is is 'sufficiently' infinite a "meta-process" for us to be precisely as we are.

Lastly, I don't know if you can tolerate my attitude "that the optimal place for a TOE is at the fringe (or periphery) of a thoroughly and realistically "Tolerance Principle" employing and centrally 'evolutionary psychobiology type' (but extrapolated possibly enough to that a complementary meaning of the word "evolution" can be one that refers to that a succession of increasingly complex patterns of energy have emerged within this universe since the big bang) Foremost Overview Of Truth.

Sorry for not having been more specific.

Cheers,

P

[mkirkpatrick]

Hello and welcome Paestimer,you are in the right place rest assured,look forward to your next post.



warmest regards michael.

[JamesANicholson]

Originally Posted by Paestimer I don't know if I ever find a pleasing home already populated by potential philosophical partners of mine (people required to be accepting of my somewhat deceptively silly shorthand-expressions) here or anywhere else on the Internet. But at least I keep probing - as if propelled by approximately such a (or roughly corresponding) purpose - to find such peers. My problem is, firstly, that (or how) I have perversely formulated (or thus made concrete by concEPTs carefully contrived partly by method of "MAD"-inspired sem_antics - i.e., a method inspired in me partly by that very *nuclear arms race shaming* acronym for "mutual assured destruction") some simple but, presumably, seldom had insights (even perhaps one or two marginally unprecedented ones) into some aspects of Truth [="how things are", or IOW, "What Is (including was and will be) going on"] and that these aspects (though the most prominent aspect of which is a to people's evolution psychology and behavior pertaining truth; more specifically how we evolved to not be 'too keen' to understand, grasp, and pay analytical and explanatory (awareness annealing) "actention" to certain truths. That is, I'm referring to having the temerity to be thinking about and coming to 'etymologically pioneering' terms with (or perversely philosophize in a philosophy-finalizing or 'effectively philosophy terminating' way about). These are aspects of Truth that will tend to be painful (or overly onerous) unless perceived through protective lenses steeped in/coated with a special sort of humor (one that I call "SEPTIC humor" - the serious and conservative meaning of which is that it might approximately stand for something like "by science sufficiently solidly established principles, theories, corroborated conclusions (etcetera). Secondly, by having observed, mostly only as a lurker, "physics insiders" locking horns, I have gained a 'surfacy' sort surety about the superiority of string/M-theory (amongst all other mathematical approaches and methods of thinking in the field of fundamental physics); and I have come to see that (as the mathematics of string theory suggests) an assumption of a sufficiently large quantity of "vacua" affords one to conclude that the only rational-philosophical (but not ultimately mathematical) explanation for what is going on is that What Is is 'sufficiently' infinite a "meta-process" for us to be precisely as we are. Lastly, I don't know if you can tolerate my attitude "that the optimal place for a TOE is at the fringe (or periphery) of a thoroughly and realistically "Tolerance Principle" employing and centrally 'evolutionary psychobiology type' (but extrapolated possibly enough to that a complementary meaning of the word "evolution" can be one that refers to that a succession of increasingly complex patterns of energy have emerged within this universe since the big bang) Foremost Overview Of Truth. Sorry for not having been more specific. Cheers, P

-----------------

Dear, P, don't worry. The nature of Nature is to be not too specific.

Close enough is close enough.

Aaron