Really? That's interesting, as I perceive myself to be somewhat of an anti-philosopher, an abrasive Yoda. Get it done or rot, there is no try. Stop thinking, stop theorizing, and just own your chit and be the person you want to be. Quit masturbating with big words and self-congratulatory "I'm just so evolved and such an INTJ" bullchit.
That is not to say I don't see value in it, but more often than not it's a dense, intentionally jargon-filled elitist subject. The topics themselves are pedestrian enough that anyone can relate to them - things like ethics, truth, the nature of man. I think these are approachable topics but the manner in which they are discussed is like a neckbeard adjusting, basement dweller personified. It comes across as though philosophers are over-complicating very basic principles of nature just to seem I Am Very Smart.
No hate, SheSprints and Wincel. Y'all know I got nothing against either of you. I just don't get it.
|
-
06-30-2018, 04:05 PM #61
-
06-30-2018, 04:09 PM #62
-
06-30-2018, 04:11 PM #63
I agree and disagree.. I do agree that a lot of the neckbeard redditors are full of fluff and no substance, but at the same time
One thing that is being underestimated here is brain power. If i go ask my hill billy neighbor whom has 0 education some of these questions #1. I bet hed say youre stupid #2. He wouldnt want to contemplate them. Hed much prefer more simple things. And go back to him making his wooden fence around the yard
Think there may be a paradox here
-
06-30-2018, 04:12 PM #64
Idk man I’m a firm believer that a universe infinitely more massive and aged than us has more observable factors than we can ever account for, therefore we’ll always be right until we’re wrong. I get your perspective though just a little too earthy for me to outright agree with
Hm.
If you're reading this, you're probably a *******
Bringer of the trigger
-
-
06-30-2018, 04:12 PM #65💪🏻Team Manlet💪🏻
--♥♥--♥♥--TEAM MISC BIG C SUPPORT--♥♥--♥♥--
"A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man." J. Springfield
BRAINWAVES: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=147989483
MIND POWER/CONFIDENCE/GOALS
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=158959453
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=150994183
STOICISM https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=173954741
1 Samuel 16:7
-
06-30-2018, 04:14 PM #66
Even if that were true, the best approach is to still go out there and do experiments to try to figure out wtf is going on rather than just try to reason your way to the correct laws and parameters (which you said there could be more than we could ever account for). Indeed, the entirety of modern physics theories are rooted in this exact idea. Every theory is a coarse grained "effective" theory. There's a cutoff, and we really can't say chit about what happens beyond certain ranges. We simply don't know, and there is no way to know because the energy required to observe behaviors at scales that small would create a black hole around the thing you were trying to measure. Unless by some stroke of good fortune, there is a unique theory to explain such mechanisms to consistently lead to the larger scale behavior we can actually see, we are stuck with effective theories.
-
06-30-2018, 04:18 PM #67
The last two sentences are, in terms of probability, more likely to be true by pure scope of the grandeur of existence. Perspectively, I find it hard to believe the same species that can’t reach their deepest oceans or the furthest recesses of their own minds may not have a limited scope in regards to measuring the entire universe. Like I said earlier pursuit of knowledge isn’t futile, only to believe in its completeness. Anyone who claims anything to be factually infallible is usually wrong
Which brings me back to the irony of a philosophy major claiming her views are logical and others aren’t and are irrevocably worth less than hers. I guess a philosophy degree doesn’t come with a minor in wisdomLast edited by DemiBrah; 06-30-2018 at 04:28 PM.
Hm.
If you're reading this, you're probably a *******
Bringer of the trigger
-
06-30-2018, 04:20 PM #68
-
-
06-30-2018, 04:29 PM #69
-
06-30-2018, 04:32 PM #70
-
06-30-2018, 04:33 PM #71
-
06-30-2018, 04:35 PM #72
Existence is merely a singularity of immaterial consciousness that creates physical realities. Nothing material really exists. Matter doesn't exist. Anything physical is purely an illusion.
Physical matter can't infinite regress anywaysPC specs
i9 9900k/AMD RX 6800 16 GB/16 GB RAM/LG BX 65'' OLED/Gigabyte GS27QC 27''
OLED Master Race crew
1440p 120+ fps only crew
6'2 master race crew
Audiophile crew
Metal crew
Introvert/INTJ crew
German crew
If you aren't getting stronger you aren't getting bigger crew
-
-
06-30-2018, 04:35 PM #73
-
06-30-2018, 04:36 PM #74
-
06-30-2018, 04:38 PM #75
-
06-30-2018, 04:40 PM #76
-
-
06-30-2018, 04:44 PM #77
-
06-30-2018, 04:46 PM #78
Got negged by wincels...lol..he's been negged by life..I'll take a small hit to green squares over your useless excuse of a life, how does it feel knowing 99% of males across the planet have felt sugar walls by age 30, and you can't? How many nights do you cry being alone? How are you in HTC crew but a virgin..yes a philosophy question for you? How does it feel to be a loser? All true wincelbrah..good luck.
Prove me wrong...sex isn't everything, but a 30 year old virgin is something nobody should endure, I can only imagine your loneliness and despair, how many times have you thought about it? Pathetic freak
-
06-30-2018, 04:48 PM #79
-
06-30-2018, 04:51 PM #80
-
-
06-30-2018, 04:51 PM #81
-
06-30-2018, 04:53 PM #82
-
06-30-2018, 04:56 PM #83
-
06-30-2018, 05:03 PM #84
Wincels, I'll send an olive branch..lol..I can get you laid by a 6/10 in 2 months with my guidance..my resume is over 100 stopped counting and forget names, I'll show you brotherly love and be your bbcom wingman.
Black Jesus can be on the cabinet but he gets a little too juicy for your first encounter..I'll take it as a challenge...I'll help you get laid by the end of this year is my challenge, accept or decline, choice is yours....btw I was voted best wingman east of the Mississippi 3 years running
-
-
06-30-2018, 05:05 PM #85
-
06-30-2018, 05:09 PM #86
-
06-30-2018, 05:10 PM #87
-
06-30-2018, 05:14 PM #88
-
-
06-30-2018, 05:18 PM #89
For the math lovers. Ill space it out since i guarantee you wont read it:
The hard problem of consciousness (Chalmers 1995) is the problem of explaining the relationship between physical phenomena, such as brain processes, and experience (i.e., phenomenal consciousness, or mental states/events with phenomenal qualities or qualia). Why are physical processes ever accompanied by experience? And why does a given physical process generate the specific experience it does—why an experience of red rather than green, for example?The hard problem contrasts with so-called easy problems, such as explaining how the brain integrates information, categorizes and discriminates environmental stimuli, or focuses attention. Such phenomena are functionally definable. That is, roughly put, they are definable in terms of what they allow a subject to do. So, for example, if mechanisms that explain how the brain integrates information are discovered, then the first of the easy problems listed would be solved. The same point applies to all other easy problems: they concern specifying mechanisms that explain how functions are performed. For the easy problems, once the relevant mechanisms are well understood, there is little or no explanatory work left to do.
Experience does not seem to fit this explanatory model (though some reductionists argue that, on reflection, it does; see the section on reductionism below). Although experience is associated with a variety of functions, explaining how those functions are performed would still seem to leave important questions unanswered. We would still want to know why their performance is accompanied by experience, and why this or that kind of experience rather than another kind. So, for example, even when we find something that plays the causal role of pain, e.g. something that is caused by nerve stimulation and that causes recoil and avoidance, we can still ask why the particular experience of hurting, as opposed to, say, itching, is associated with that role. Such problems are hard problems.
Cognitive models of consciousness (Barrs 1988) are sometimes described as potential solutions to the hard problem. However, it is unclear that any such model could achieve that goal. For example, consider global workspace theory, according to which the contents of consciousness are globally available for various cognitive processes such as attention, memory, and verbal report. Even if this theory is correct, the connection between such processes and experience—e.g., why they are accompanied by experience at all—might well remain opaque. For similar reasons, discovering neural correlates of consciousness might leave the hard problem unsolved: the question as to why those correlations exist would remain unanswered. Nevertheless, scientific advances on cognitive models and neural correlates of consciousness might well play important roles in a comprehensive solution.
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/..._consciousness
-
06-30-2018, 05:20 PM #90
Bookmarks