The debate of free-will and determinism is a massive topic - it’s often considered to mean different things, and is seldom considered in perhaps the most relevant sense. Is it more relevant to analyze actions from their origin? Of external influence? Of genetics? This post will assert that the free-will/determinism dichotomy is a false dichotomy; and that free-will is possible, but often skewed by factors of external influence.
This post introduces the foundation of metaphysics necessary for future posts; it will address a few common conceptions of reality; and it will prove, perhaps most importantly, the underlying mechanisms of reality and its corresponding logical consistency.
This post introduces the foundation of epistemology necessary for future posts. It will address information, concepts, and knowledge; the 'location' of knowledge; and the formation of priori, and of posteriori.
Universal morality is a treasure sought by philosophers for millennia. Can we say that an immoral action taken by a is also immoral when taken by b? Can we say that moral actors have the capacity to be immoral? Does it matter the building you work in? The color of your shirt? Perhaps the style of your hair? Referencing Stefan Molyneux's 'Universally Preferable Behavior: a Rational Proof of Secular Ethics,' this post will (re)solve the age-long question, and serve as a foundation for a future-posts analyzing society and voluntary relationships.