Let's have an actual philosophy thread.
What is Veeky Forums's opinion on Christopher Langan's "Cognitive Theoretic Model of Reality?" I think it's probably the most revolutionary work in philosophy of science for hundreds of years. Langan shows that reality itself is "relative" to our theories in much the same way that time is relative.
Of course it takes some intelligence to understand, so leave this thread if your IQ is below 140.
ctmu.org
Other urls found in this thread:
www3.nd.edu
twitter.com
Great idea. I brought joints for everybody.
I'll begin.
What is, like, the *meaning* of, like "meaning"?
Meaning is dependent on the mind that grasps onto any concept
Why?
Sam Harris finished it all.
What a wonderful joke. Maybe you're too scared of Langan's 200+ IQ to engage with his work? If so leave the thread and don't embarrass yourself any further.
Good to see at least one person grasps the TRUTH about reality.
>if your IQ is below 140.
'your'
hahahahahaha
how embarrassing
rekt
well this is embarrassing for you, isn't it
>l-le didn't le mean it
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH!!!!
appeal to authority
>thread dead after the first post
As you are no doubt aware, appealing to an EXPERT is not a logical fallacy. There is no higher EXPERT on philosophy of physics right now than Langan, and his IQ is relevant to that fact.
>IQ is relevant to that fact
IQ = expertise?
I don't think so senpai
Actually if I appeal to God to tell you he's wrong I win by this logic.
Checkmate.
Mocking and scoffing won't change the fact that you don't even GRASP Langan's ideas, much less possess his SKILL, KNOWLEDGE and INTELLECT. Just read CTMU and see if you can refute it, I dare you.
I've already read it. It's pap.
Does it solve the hard problem of consciousness?
Yes. Read the theory and you will see if your IQ is high enough.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but
1) Langan IQ has nothing to do with the philosophical coherence of his paper
2) He is a nobody in the academia. It follows that nobody knows who he is and that his work certainly isn't "the most revolutionary work in philosophy of science".
3) No one gives a rat's ass what you think since it's pretty evident that you wouldn't get past the first sentence of an arbitrary paper in contemporary philosophy of science. You are destined to discuss science and philosophy on the level of Veeky Forums--using such sensationalist claims as "the most revolutionary", "actual philosophy", "0.999999... is not equal to 1. And here's why...", "Is consciousness just a quantum process modelled by a two-valued ordered lattice?" etc.
You might have better luck if you posted this on Veeky Forums where crackpots are given the benefit of doubt.
RËKT
AHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHHH
Ok, I gave it a try OP, unfortunately
>The only firm requirements are that it (1) have a subject, and (2) be stated in a language in terms of which the subject can be coherently described. Where these criteria hold, the theory can always be “formalized”, or translated into the symbolic language of logic and mathematics.
stopped right there
Doesn't seem very genius to me :^)
what's with the faggy obsession with IQ
Your
poo
It's what "lazy, but smart" Veeky Forums procrastinators make use of when confronted with something that is beyond their heads.
muh projector
...
He's right though. Bragging about your iq on the internet is the adult equivalent of bragging about your college entrance exam scores as a senior with a 2.5 GPA.
>replying to this obvious bait
Trully, a thread for intellectual titans.
>he's le smart so he's right
>he's le smart according to my arbitrary empiricist metric so he's smart
He's a Veeky Forums troll that has been poisoning the board for the past few weeks.
>The life of Man, viewed outwardly, is but a small thing in comparison with the forces of Nature. The slave is doomed to worship Time and Fate and Death, because they are greater than anything he finds in himself, and because all his thoughts are of things which they devour. But, great as they are, to think of them greatly, to feel their passionless splendour, is greater still. And such thought makes us free men; we no longer bow before the inevitable in Oriental subjection, but we absorb it, and make it a part of ourselves. To abandon the struggle for private happiness, to expel all eagerness of temporary desire, to burn with passion for eternal things--this is emancipation, and this is the free man's worship. And this liberation is effected by a contemplation of Fate; for Fate itself is subdued by the mind which leaves nothing to be purged by the purifying fire of Time.
Something about this just makes me happy. So, so beautiful. Sorry, I've nothing insightful to say right now, I just wanted to share one of my favorite parts of "A Free Man's Worship"
(text here: www3.nd.edu
I like all of your refutations of Langan's ideas. All I see are ad hominem attacks. I think frankly most of you are too scared to really confront the notion that GOD exists and will judge you.
>Something about this just makes me happy.
wasn't you told "to abandon the struggle for private happiness" :3
>he's le smart according to my arbitrary empiricist metric so he's smart
Low IQ detected. IQ absolutely correlates with almost all measurable aspects of intelligence, but it's an AVERAGE, something a low-to-mid IQ person has trouble grasping, hence posts like yours.