Pihilosophy is so fucking stupid. It's really obvious that you have logic/math/natural rules...

¿Cuál es su opinión de Kant?

Good question...

>philosophy is stupid
>uses philosophy to create a disgusting positivist darwinist meaning of life

>>Pihilosophy
It had to be bait

Why should I accept that I'm merely "ever changing neural activity"?

>Pihilosophy is so fucking stupid
continues to pihilophize-diarrhea all all over the place

Natural ones.
a law - a guiding principle on how matter interacts
Kant is simply wrong because the world does exist indipendently of me and there's no reason to think that changes once I'm gone.
Because it's true

Please be in high school

Boy do I have a book for you

J E Z E B E L S

Why does (this) truth have any weight? What is the benefit to accepting this scientific image of man?

What is truth?

Gonna humor you for a second, you're extremely stupid but I'll bite:

>Pihilosophy is so fucking stupid. It's really obvious that you have logic/math/natural rules, aka consistent rules that bring about reality.
philosophical proposition and argument, logic and philosophy are sister disciplines, if not the same thing.
>Those patterns just are, and theu have resulted in life, aka just another pattern of logic
I don't think you know what you're talking about, logic is a system of rules that organic systems and computers use to compute outputs and to organize information. Life and physical systems appear to follow logical rules that can be expressed in mathematical models, using complex algos and gigantic supercomputers
>The purpose of life is to just be; just being results in side effects, eg evolution, everything in our experience so far has likely came from evolution, aka those logical pattens.
There is no purpose to life, you're starting to build a metaphysics without realizing it at all. There is no teleology in nature at all, you're straying from your bio-physicalist presuppositions already, and its really clear you haven't taken formal logic or never bothered using it to think, maybe to do hw and exams but surely not to apply it to your own style of thought and speech. Your post isn't ordered properly either, think harder before sliding threads, especially when you're full of shit and just want attention.
>Most of life, such as humanity as a superorganism was designed to evolve
define a superorganism in scientific terms, at least using a graduate level of understanding of evo-bio and ecology, please.
>therefore just doing what is logical to keep evolving as a superorganism seems like the most logical path.
you should read more, so you don't make redundant statements like that, and it doesn't follow at all from your premise there sport
>Thats the barebones tldr, but other scraps that are kind of important
you failed the occam's razor styling you were trying to portray yourself with, this is much more complex than you purport it to be and you made a mess already, calling it a TLDR or barebones is idiotic, again put that at the end of the post. Think about what you're going to say before you say it, if you don't have high fluid intelligence, which it appears you do not.
>your consciousness is literally the product of ever changing neural activity, "YOU" dont exist.
The first is controversial and ignoring genetics, the biochemistry of the endocrine system, the gastointestinal system, ecological consciousness, hive consciousness, random noise being taken in as inputs and then being outputted as "consciousness" which is something a lot of schizos and religious people can't understand.
>YOU don't exist
also controversial, I agree with you though. No arguments from me (err this system or whatever)

How do you know about these natural rules? How do we have access to them?

>dude it's just obvious
>dude look at my dogmatic assertions
>doesn't understand the hard problem

it has been done it said in the envelope my love said the woman of mine to m. i nodded to her and walked out of the building in which we resides on a permanent basis atleast htis was planed so right now. On the streets outside waking to an appointment of grand importance to me and my fellow wife i greeted a friend of mine who went by the name of Lavalle and i said to lavalle: hey my friend Lavalle how is it that you are doing my friiend lavalle.He looked at me for a minute in disbelief then he moved closer to me until i could hear and feel his breath at my ear so close now, so very close now that i felt like ssomething was sucking me out of my brain while the breath was being breathed rhytmically into my brain that he was sucking my brain out by doing so and then it actually happened i was now in lavalles brain just a soul of a former human being being stored in the chambers of lvalles brain. Lavalle moved through the streets feasting on his triumph and sat down at a coffee store where he observed the humans buying things because their wifes ahd told them so. A man stood naked there he was overweight and had gray hair and glasses on. the man mumbled about his wife having disappeare. he mumbled about him not knowing what to do anymore with his life. Lavalle sensed the lack of direction, the lack of coordinates. the old man had lost hhis fundament. " he came here because he remembers that he used to come here for his wife" said lavalle to the store owner who ignored him and mechanically moved goods into the plastic bags and handed them to the customers and said: Happy new weekend. "I'm counting the money" said the shopkeeper and counted the money. The sum is 2 dollars and 84 cents said the shopkeeper and lazily inserted the money into a box beneath the table. Hello new customer said the storekeeper and the old naked man said that he didn't know where he lived anymore and he mumbled something about being tired and needing a place to live at. I left this store thought lavalle and left it. Outside he heard a distant call of a woman who shouted Lavalle Lavalle Lavalle. He followed her call until he reached her apartment. Her face was obscured by objects. Sit down Lavalle she said and pointed towards the seat. Show it to me, she said to Lavalle. He opened up his head and pointed at the chamber of souls. The woman looked at my exposed soul and giggled. "that's all there is?" she said and laughed. That's all you men are?! she said and laughed hysteriucally until she fell down to the ground, twisting from laughter, being driven by rapture she started beating her hands on the tile floor until her knockles were bleeding and screamed form laughter. Lavalle had seen enough and left the apartment. "what a day" thought lavalle and walked down the streets. The old man had lost his wife and as such no longer knew who he was reflected Lavalle. I must leave here soon i thought. Lavalle answered that i will never leave. How terrible to think, begging to be ridicule

>world does exist indipendently of me

What's your argument for that?

INDUCTIVE

My senses, which have evolved to percieve the order of nature.
Whatever is the case.
Mathematics and science seem to be working towards our telos of ultimate-becoming.
1) I assign no special value for conciousness other than an evolutionary advantage. It's merely a result of physical interactions.
2) There are other people and the world exists indipendently of them (because it keeps existing when they die)

(cont.)
>Nothing is external, everything is happening in your brain, therefore every moment you're a different entity, if you were to transfer your consciousness into a machine, would it still be "you"? No, because you are merely the ever changing neural activity. There is no "you" part in the brain.
You're muddying the waters here user, while its true that "nothing is external" in the sense that the subjective self-model interiority is basically everything you've ever experienced (One Mind in Eastern Traditions understood properly) you're not saying much and you're purposefully shying away from the fact that the "inside my head" nature of consciousness is actually extremely exposed to the environment and other people's minds, you could be said to be inside more than just your brain philosophically.
>Meaning that even death means nothing because you already dont exist in a way.
you could not exist and it could still have significance for your organism, you're over reaching again
>Experience is merely a tool to evolve, but as we have evolved rapidly, not all areas of our brain have kept up, so for example eating sugar has negative consequences but results in a good short term reward.
Experience is a thing that happens to organisms, subjective consciousness (which you're trying to get out of saying repeatedly, which indicates bad faith argumentation, making huge assumptions you haven't argued for properly) is a method for organisms to navigate the world. Evolution is what they are doing, not what they are headed towards or intending.
> but as we have evolved rapidly, not all areas of our brain have kept up, so for example eating sugar has negative consequences but results in a good short term reward.
yeah you don't understand neuroscience at all, you sound like you're a posturing pseud who hasn't even gotten into grad school and isn't studying most of the subjects you're trying to throw in our faces.
> Chasing experience or having "happiness" as a goal is flawed because often that results in a directionless chase, which goes against itself and results in unhappyness/bad experience, it goes against what we were biologically designed for
If there's no self and we're just biological automatons then you need to amend this to say: "some organic systems are """"illogical""" and """Chase""" happiness or the stimulus associated with it when its not necessary and has not intrinsic purpose" again I don't think you're intelligent even a little bit.
>If you dont value experience, you appreciate what you already have, but focus even focus on it.
yup, low IQ and low conscientiousness, its dripping off you now.
>Doing what you were designed to do (evolve) is aligned with what you are and is therefore creates the least duality.
complete gibberish if we accept your premises, learn to logic.
>You dont even need discipline to do whats right, you just do it naturally, there is no goal
that doesn't jive with being biological robots

>My senses, which have evolved to percieve the order of nature.

>My senses accurately perceive nature based on a theory that was constructed using senses which were presupposed to accurately perceive nature

>There is no teleology in nature at all
Um, I'm not so sure about this. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a religious guy, but I think it's impossible to say if there's a "teleology in nature" or not. The Theory of Evolution for example is quite teleological. Just sayin'.

>It's really obvious that you have logic/math/natural rules, aka consistent rules that bring about reality.

Those laws only describe. They don't cause anything. 2+2 is 4 and that never put two pounds in my pocket >yes quik maths

Oh get familiar with Godel's Incompleteness theorems. There exist statements (axioms) in math that we know to be true but cannot prove as such. The alternative would be that the axiomatic system is inconsistent and a single statement can be proven both true and false. And I take it that you do not subscribe to the falsity of mathematical platonism.

tfw OP is a retarded high schooler that thinks science is really cool

>applying Godel outside the very specific area of set theory.
Begone pseud.
Evolution is not teleological. It's merely a system to adopting to the enviornment. The whole system has no goal, there are simply organs operating on their own. Nature isn't selecting for anything specific.
lol

>Um, I'm not so sure about this
i don't care about what you're sure about, I care about what's actually real. You dilettante
>Don't get me wrong, I'm not a religious guy
I don't care at all about your pet beliefs, I care about your arguments.
> but I think it's impossible to say if there's a "teleology in nature" or not
its not, bio-physicalist ontology completely precludes teleology
> but I think it's impossible to say if there's a "teleology in nature" or not
not its not you just have a high school level understanding of evolutionary theory, you're a pseud whose posturing like I said. you came on here to start a fight with idealists and people who believe in free will, go read a book you fucking idiot
>Just sayin'
of course, backing down from your own arguments because you don't understand formal logic or biology or physics or the philosophy of science or mind, you haven't read anything beyond Dawkins-Tier starter nonsense for bug brained little shits

Please don't post on this board again until you have:
>learned philosophical reasoning, deduction, induction, abduction, formal logic, modal logic etc
>studied neuroscience at least at a graduate level
>studied evo-biology, behavioral genomics at a graduate level
>have familiarized yourself with the many arguments against physicalism and for idealism and vis-versa
>learned to format and organize your posts/thoughts

Have a blessed day user

>doesn't know first order peano arithmetic
Also, doesn't matter if it only applies to set theory. There'd still be a Gödel statement that mathematics couldn't approve (assuming mathematical platonism)... So, where were you trying to go with this?

reels of footage racing down my mind. My mother. mother. My father. father. my sisters. sisters. my little brother. Little borther. My school. school. My friends. My friends. A vacation at ohama beach. Machine gun fire i saw in the distance mowing down the men doomed to die on this bitter day of victory. TheI is an illusion a friend said to me which made me laugh bitterly. Who said this to me, i asked him. "My body did" said my friend and i laughed maliciously and said: Whose body did? I was no longer friends with this person. There is little that i despise in this world than a lack of understanding of one's own contradictions, of half-thought thoughts. Dear lord, how pathetic must a mind be to not be able to perceive rapidly the contradictions of one's own thinking? Is there anything as naive as the person which believes itself? Is there anything as ridiculous as a person who talks about truth without ridiculing truth?
I am getting hung up. I should not bother this much and besides, alll of my moaning is just in jest. It is fair to say whatever you wish to say. We have such a grand variety of religion in our days. I just wish we would move away from the conception of religion requiring a god. That's an eurocentric position which reeks of ignorance. It would be wise to consider the fundamentals of religion and acknowledge that god is merely a joker, one which has been used already and is thus no longer eligible for this round of the game, i speculate.

How easily we are seduced into mazes. How easily i am seduced into mazes. The bittersweet music of the zitar calling me into yet another adventure of disorientation. I could have walked straight paths through life. I could have had an easy life, if you allow me to make such an idiotic proposition. But i steered away. I was once more seduced into entering a maze. In this maze the walls were red. And the floors were shapes of geographic constitution. In my hand was a light. It shone on the red brick wallls. I walked steadily forward. I knew i had to seek an answer. I knew i had to be perceptive ofpatterns. I knew that sticking to the left wall was in vain due to my experience of the scale that the mazes of thinking had. I had to play against the maze by the logic of the maze. But analyzing this logic and then reaching a functioning strategy to deefeat this maze by it's own rules, it was not an easy task. My blood moved quickly through my weak and nimble body. There was a rush of excitement that raised my penis into the height. Back again to my place of greatest desire. The maze was my room. Here all of my dreams came true. Like in a pleasant dream i moved restlessly and unknowingly through this maze. The anxiety comforted me. It is in many ways the same feeling as starting a new book by an unknown writer. sacrifice all notions of truth; of reality. All that you had known has been erased, and a new world, a new superstructure of reality has appeared. No, not just appeared. You have been teleported

>The whole system has no goal, there are simply organs operating on their own.
That's a pretty modern understanding of it. Interestingly enough, Darwin thought otherwise: he thought, the process of evolution would ultimately end up in perfect beings which were adaptable to everything (which is an astonishing parallel to Hegel's dialectics, btw.) But it was just an example. But a possible teleology of nature is simply a nice thought experiment imo, you might write an interesting sci-fi novel about it, nothing more, nothing less.

>its not, bio-physicalist ontology completely precludes teleology
As you said, it precludes teleology ontologically. That means, we don't know, if there are teleological processes at work, we just agreed not to use them as a pattern to explain things in natural sciences anymore.

Btw. I can kind of understand the way you're responding OP's possible bait - nevertheless, he managed to provoke you in a way you didn't even realize, I wasn't OP anymore (which was pretty easy to notize).

>you don't understand formal logic or biology or physics or the philosophy of science or mind
Well, I won't tell you which academic title I'm allowed to use...

Community collegefag masquerading as a STEMfag baiting liberal artsfags with deliberate misspellings. Kid's got talent.

darwin was a pseud

/thread

wow so clever, so smart. Make a thread, draw people in, slide normal threads, pretend to care about learning. You don't at all, its just an excuse to not read or discuss, and voila you've just lowered the quality of the whole site. Thanks guys

do you have the book list or at least authors to reach your level understanding?

criminally underrated

This entire thread, my poor sides holy shit i love you autist, this is the power of Veeky Forums bantz

LEL

But for real OP, if you hate awareness that's fine but you ARE doing philosophy whether you want to or not (real bad philosophy, if you haven't noticed from the comments).

This post is the equivalent to being asked to do an equation, looking at the numbers and symbols involved, and just throwing your hands up and saying, "Oh the answer is obviously something to do with numbers." The problem doesn't get done, the answer you gave was half-assed, and you've implicitly declared that you're too lazy/too much of an ignoramus to throw down and give it a shot. And, you know what, that's okay so long as you know you are literally retarded.

Philosophy begins and ends with Hegel.

Literally try to prove me wrong. You can't.

>thinking Godel's theorems are limited to set theory
who's pseuding who?

Consciousness is not capable of being completely aware of itself, and when we are conscious of ourselves, the "us" we are conscious of is not likewise conscious of us.

Hegel makes presuppositions during the entirety of his phenomenology, despite claiming not to do so.

Shapes of Consciousness are not capable of going beyond themselves. Every argument Hegel makes to disprove the validity of a certain shape requires the shape above it.

Wealth and Power do not represent two forces of the state in any significant way.

Absolute Truth is not Substance that is Subject, and humans are incapable of grasping Absolute Truth.

That said, Hegel's Preface is a great example of how to get people to read your work by bantering the shit out of everybody.

Who cares ? Philosophy is dumb to be honest.

>thinks reasoning and critical thinking is exclusive to philosophy
>hehe

>Mathematics and Science seem to be working towards our telos of ultimate-becoming
>Godel proves mathematics is always going to be incomplete
>Quantam mechanics parallels similar ideas of uncertainty, or that knowledge of one precludes knowledge of the other

If you think either mathematics or science have any fulfillment in which there will be no more to learn, no more "gaps" to fill in, then you're too far gone to reason with.

you seriously think the OP shows any sign of critical thinking?

>humanity as a superorganism was designed to evolve

>The purpose of life is to just be
Yeah and what is Being? Why are you supposing a purpose? Are you saying that all being is purposive?
>Your consciousness is literally the product of ever changing neural activity, "YOU" dont exist.
Literally prove to me that cs'ness can emerge from complex systems. How exactly could it possibly do that. Look at Searle's Chinese Room thought experiment. In fact, just read a single article on the problems of physicalist theories.
>Most of life, such as humanity as a superorganism was designed to evolve
Evolution doesn't emerge from a teleological project. There is no "design."

>The Theory of Evolution for example is quite teleological.
It most certainly is not. A mechanism of self-reproduction continues to self-reproduce given its level of efficiency. There is no intention involved whatsoever.

*insert Jezebelpasta*

its, its bait

what a lazy world view

I want to "fuck" Lauren to be honest.

>set up cameras
>leave room
>observe world existing without you

How are philosophers any different, or their thoughts?

>It's really obvious

You forget something of interest. Emotions are real phenomena, as is intent. These are present in all fauna to a varying degree. The theory is shallow if it doesn't apply all factors.

Logic is philosophy you fucking mong.

>"philosophy is stupid!"
>proceeds to philosophize (and very badly at that)

>tfw i was once similar to this 16 year old /b/ro.

my thoughts exactly m8
OP claims to hate philosophy and then proceeds to do everything that is wrong with philosophy, just making broad assumptions and generalisations

>all these people who think they "got" op by doing mental masturbation over semantics
>not realizing that this is why philosophy is awful

Continental philosophy is a cancer on culture and academia

philosophy doesn't do that you fucking brainlet

>look at camera footage through sense perception

try again

>all these people who don’t realize its bait and OP is a sociopath

>>Continental philosophy is a cancer on culture and academia
which is why people are reccing academic philosophers

Wow you sure showed him.

>durr philosophy is stupid
>let me make philosophical claims to explain why
heh, tough luck, kiddo.
*flies away*

>you came on here to start a fight with idealists
They believe everyone in here is either Parmenides, Hermes Trimegistus, Leibniz, or Giovanni Gentile, and it's naturalists and scientific realists they end up arguing with. Every fucking time.

Is this Naive realism or something?
I seriously dont know, TL;DR

Call me gay but I want to snuggle with her on the sofa and watch scared cat videos while townes van zandt plays on the background

t. brainlet

>snuggling to Townes van Zandt

dude wtf

Logical positivism fizzled out ages ago.

If I needed you, fraulein, the list goes on... Is it really that weird?

>lifeforms are teleological

You are but an anthropomorphising little babbi boy

Watch this *snaps your spine*

Begone, pleb

>I assign

>There are other people
are there? you could perceive other bodies, but are there other consciousnesses?

You really shouldn't be lumping math in here

Philosophy is something that comes very natural to humans but math is not

It really bothers me that I cant zoom in on that picture of a pretty girl.

>ij-it's obfus

user i just want to know the name of the jezebel goddamn

Philosophy is much more than phenomenology.

>It's really obvious that you have logic/math/natural rules, aka consistent rules that bring about reality.
I'd disagree.

Also this is literally philosophy

I would eviscerate your your retarded philosophy but it seems every one already has me covered so I'm just dropping by to laugh at you

He means modern philosophy

lmao