It's very hard for me to express to you how powerfully you impose your structure upon the conversation.
Are you saying that your don't think that your human brain imposes a reductive structure upon your perception of reality? Are you saying that "falsifiiability" isn't a filter than excludes information? Do you think that everything is theoretically knowable by humans?
I hope we can get to the bottom of this. Whenever we talk about these things I feel like I'm on a playing field where my entire way of thinking is ruled out.
Why are you so invested in determinism?
I think we should try to stick with this friction and try to understand what it's about.
My experience of science is from reading innumerable abstracts from scientific research on psychiatric drugs, nutrition and health hazards, (medical science) from being an object of science, from undergoing physical harm from science, from watching others undergo physical harm, and most recently seeing geoengineers propose to fuck with the atmosphere, which will be the next horror. I think geoengineering is the scariest thing I've encountered so far, and I think it will be promoted by people like Obama. It's the ultimate Business as Usual.
What is your response about the fermi paradox? why would other life forms be involved in our technologies and aspirations?
What is it that you object to in terms of what I'm saying about Buddhism and becoming aware of ego-centric assumptions? Is not the shifting baseline an egocentric assumption that is delusional?
There's a way that our arguments make no contact. This means that we have entirely different paradigms, if we don't even make sense to each other.
By the way, I really like jeremy Jackson, he reminds me of Jay, and I enjoy his sarcasm, he's very sweet in a way...