Pluralistic Panpsychism v. Monistic Idealism: another response to Kastrup (part 1 of 2)

Might it be better to say “truth is fluid and constantly flowing” rather than using “diplomatic”? (Diplomatic seems to imply that a compromise is necessary, when instead, compromise is infinite).

Footnotes2Plato

Kastrup has responded to my post a few days ago. The topic? Panpsychism.

In any back and forth discussion like this, it is important to acknowledge that each of us has evidently written a great deal articulating our perspectives. Other than his brief essay on the threat of panpsychism, I have not read any of Kastrup’s work, nor do I believe he has read any of mine, aside from my even briefer response to him. So what we are going to be able to accomplish in these all too short responses to one another will, I’m afraid, be minimal. Certainly I do not expect to persuade him to give up his monistic idealism. My main motivation in responding is not to indisputably refute him, or to fully articulate my own pluralist ontology. Rather, I only hope to gesture toward the answers to the questions he raises by offering a somewhat…

View original post 1,608 more words

Advertisements