<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Philosophy of Reality</title>
	<atom:link href="http://philosophyofreality.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://philosophyofreality.com</link>
	<description>Understanding Reality Using the Rules of Cause &#38; Effect</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 06:40:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Reality of Math by Rahul Nair</title>
		<link>http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/08/19/the-reality-of-math/comment-page-1/#comment-4007</link>
		<dc:creator>Rahul Nair</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 06:40:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosophyofreality.com/?p=92#comment-4007</guid>
		<description>Right you are. An interesting post, really good one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Right you are. An interesting post, really good one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The USA Justice System is Broken by Reality of Self Defense Laws &#124; Philosophy of Reality</title>
		<link>http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/11/01/the-usa-justice-system-is-broken/comment-page-1/#comment-3966</link>
		<dc:creator>Reality of Self Defense Laws &#124; Philosophy of Reality</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 03:56:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosophyofreality.com/?p=217#comment-3966</guid>
		<description>[...] then the situation should be investigated, preferably in the manner I mention in my post about justice systems. (I.E. trying to determine the truth, not assign [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] then the situation should be investigated, preferably in the manner I mention in my post about justice systems. (I.E. trying to determine the truth, not assign [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Too Many Laws by Reality of Self Defense Laws &#124; Philosophy of Reality</title>
		<link>http://philosophyofreality.com/2012/02/21/too-many-laws/comment-page-1/#comment-3962</link>
		<dc:creator>Reality of Self Defense Laws &#124; Philosophy of Reality</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Apr 2012 20:44:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosophyofreality.com/?p=469#comment-3962</guid>
		<description>[...] can&#8217;t cover what they&#8217;re intended to cover. (I discuss more about this in my article Too Many Laws.) And no more so is this fact presented than in self defense [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] can&#8217;t cover what they&#8217;re intended to cover. (I discuss more about this in my article Too Many Laws.) And no more so is this fact presented than in self defense [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Laws of Cause and Effect by Rik</title>
		<link>http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/07/09/the-laws-of-cause-and-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-3808</link>
		<dc:creator>Rik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2012 17:49:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosophyofreality.com/?p=12#comment-3808</guid>
		<description>Thanks, I will see this documentation film.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, I will see this documentation film.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Laws of Cause and Effect by Josh</title>
		<link>http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/07/09/the-laws-of-cause-and-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-3804</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2012 02:46:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosophyofreality.com/?p=12#comment-3804</guid>
		<description>I never said things can&#039;t happen over and over. In fact I state so expressly. &quot;The exact same cause will produce the exact same effect.&quot;

This philosophy comes from a simple premise: Cause produces Effect. If you can prove that wrong, let me know. From that simple premise, I figured out these sub-laws, as one leads smoothly to another. Again, if you can find fault in any single one of them, I&#039;ll be happy to learn. However, try watching Stephen Hawking&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Brief_History_of_Time_%28film%29&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;A Brief History of Time&lt;/a&gt;. The part where he admits he was wrong about time going backward is especially instructive.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I never said things can&#8217;t happen over and over. In fact I state so expressly. &#8220;The exact same cause will produce the exact same effect.&#8221;</p>
<p>This philosophy comes from a simple premise: Cause produces Effect. If you can prove that wrong, let me know. From that simple premise, I figured out these sub-laws, as one leads smoothly to another. Again, if you can find fault in any single one of them, I&#8217;ll be happy to learn. However, try watching Stephen Hawking&#8217;s <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Brief_History_of_Time_%28film%29" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">A Brief History of Time</a>. The part where he admits he was wrong about time going backward is especially instructive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Laws of Cause and Effect by Rik</title>
		<link>http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/07/09/the-laws-of-cause-and-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-3803</link>
		<dc:creator>Rik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2012 00:55:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosophyofreality.com/?p=12#comment-3803</guid>
		<description>It is the assertion of it that is faulty. Unless these sub-laws are not absolute statements.

You are asking me to prove a negative. That is impossible. If you claim some thing, you should bring the evidence yourself.

I brought up time specifically because of your example &quot;A tree can’t make the seed it grew from. It can only make seeds for new trees.&quot;  with the underlying assertion &quot;No effect can be its own cause&quot;.

With just the two assumtions Reality is, and Reality causes effects, there is no reason why things could not happen again and again and again. However unlikely that currently may seem.

Adding the assertion like you did limits the possibilities unsupportedly. Excluding many possible unknown variables not uncovered yet.

On the subject of my issue with time being another subjects. No subject is unrelated to another ;-)

Quote: &quot;But then, to have a philosophy that covers everything, the foundation needs to be basic, simple and useable for all situations.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is the assertion of it that is faulty. Unless these sub-laws are not absolute statements.</p>
<p>You are asking me to prove a negative. That is impossible. If you claim some thing, you should bring the evidence yourself.</p>
<p>I brought up time specifically because of your example &#8220;A tree can’t make the seed it grew from. It can only make seeds for new trees.&#8221;  with the underlying assertion &#8220;No effect can be its own cause&#8221;.</p>
<p>With just the two assumtions Reality is, and Reality causes effects, there is no reason why things could not happen again and again and again. However unlikely that currently may seem.</p>
<p>Adding the assertion like you did limits the possibilities unsupportedly. Excluding many possible unknown variables not uncovered yet.</p>
<p>On the subject of my issue with time being another subjects. No subject is unrelated to another <img src='http://philosophyofreality.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Quote: &#8220;But then, to have a philosophy that covers everything, the foundation needs to be basic, simple and useable for all situations.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Laws of Cause and Effect by Josh</title>
		<link>http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/07/09/the-laws-of-cause-and-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-3802</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2012 00:08:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosophyofreality.com/?p=12#comment-3802</guid>
		<description>&quot;I can’t assert the “No effect can be its own cause”, since that is an unknown.&quot;
====================
Actually, it&#039;s quite known. I invite you to give me any known occurrence of that law being broken. If you understand and believe in the basic &lt;i&gt;concept&lt;/i&gt; of cause &amp; effect, you&#039;ll find those laws essentially impossible to find fault with.

As for your issue with time, that&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/07/14/the-nature-of-time/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;another subject&lt;/a&gt;. One I touch briefly on in the linked post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I can’t assert the “No effect can be its own cause”, since that is an unknown.&#8221;<br />
====================<br />
Actually, it&#8217;s quite known. I invite you to give me any known occurrence of that law being broken. If you understand and believe in the basic <i>concept</i> of cause &amp; effect, you&#8217;ll find those laws essentially impossible to find fault with.</p>
<p>As for your issue with time, that&#8217;s <a href="http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/07/14/the-nature-of-time/" rel="nofollow">another subject</a>. One I touch briefly on in the linked post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Laws of Cause and Effect by Rik</title>
		<link>http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/07/09/the-laws-of-cause-and-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-3795</link>
		<dc:creator>Rik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2012 01:02:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosophyofreality.com/?p=12#comment-3795</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t assert the &quot;No effect can be its own cause&quot;, since that is an unknown. There is no evidence for it. How would you go about prooving that?

The assertion &#039;R=sC+sE&#039; only assumes: Reality is, and Reality causes effects. Where you put the &#039;events&#039;, &#039;objects&#039;, &#039;ideas&#039;, &#039;numbers&#039;, &#039;actions&#039;, etc. does not matter in this abstraction. Reality is both the group and its parts.

From a human emotional perspective linear time matters, as it provides a feeling of being in control. While in my opinion &#039;time&#039;, like many other absolute-words, is just a description for &#039;the unknown&#039;. Thereby marking our gaps in knowledge of causality using these soft wordings.

In my opinion, this is the very reason why all these gods have these nice absolute properties. Because we don&#039;t know much and are often saturated or overwhelmed by Reality.

Stress causes denial, repetition, addiction, believe and such, which creates order again. Or does so seemingly. Not really.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t assert the &#8220;No effect can be its own cause&#8221;, since that is an unknown. There is no evidence for it. How would you go about prooving that?</p>
<p>The assertion &#8216;R=sC+sE&#8217; only assumes: Reality is, and Reality causes effects. Where you put the &#8216;events&#8217;, &#8216;objects&#8217;, &#8216;ideas&#8217;, &#8216;numbers&#8217;, &#8216;actions&#8217;, etc. does not matter in this abstraction. Reality is both the group and its parts.</p>
<p>From a human emotional perspective linear time matters, as it provides a feeling of being in control. While in my opinion &#8216;time&#8217;, like many other absolute-words, is just a description for &#8216;the unknown&#8217;. Thereby marking our gaps in knowledge of causality using these soft wordings.</p>
<p>In my opinion, this is the very reason why all these gods have these nice absolute properties. Because we don&#8217;t know much and are often saturated or overwhelmed by Reality.</p>
<p>Stress causes denial, repetition, addiction, believe and such, which creates order again. Or does so seemingly. Not really.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Laws of Cause and Effect by Josh</title>
		<link>http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/07/09/the-laws-of-cause-and-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-3791</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Apr 2012 16:43:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosophyofreality.com/?p=12#comment-3791</guid>
		<description>Be &lt;em&gt;very&lt;/em&gt; careful when using math to describe Cause &amp; Effect. In math the numbers are interchangeable. (I.E. 1+2 is the same as 2+1) However, C&amp;E can &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; be reversed. An effect cannot precede its own cause. A tree can&#039;t make the seed it grew from. It can only make seeds for new trees.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Be <em>very</em> careful when using math to describe Cause &#038; Effect. In math the numbers are interchangeable. (I.E. 1+2 is the same as 2+1) However, C&#038;E can <strong>not</strong> be reversed. An effect cannot precede its own cause. A tree can&#8217;t make the seed it grew from. It can only make seeds for new trees.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Laws of Cause and Effect by Rik</title>
		<link>http://philosophyofreality.com/2010/07/09/the-laws-of-cause-and-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-3790</link>
		<dc:creator>Rik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Apr 2012 12:52:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosophyofreality.com/?p=12#comment-3790</guid>
		<description>You seem to think like me.

I would simply put it: R=sC+sE. Cause and Effect being functionally equivalent. And &#039;s&#039; for simplification, since one cause can have multiple direct effects. And of course &#039;R&#039; for Reality or Result.

It is basically what the scientific method boils down to.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You seem to think like me.</p>
<p>I would simply put it: R=sC+sE. Cause and Effect being functionally equivalent. And &#8216;s&#8217; for simplification, since one cause can have multiple direct effects. And of course &#8216;R&#8217; for Reality or Result.</p>
<p>It is basically what the scientific method boils down to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

