-  [WT]  [PS]  [Home] [Manage]

  1.   (new thread)
  2. [ No File]
  3. (for post and file deletion)
/phi/ - Philosophy
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 1000 KB.
  • Images greater than 200x200 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 788 unique user posts. View catalog

  • Blotter updated: 2018-08-24 Show/Hide Show All

We are in the process of fixing long-standing bugs with the thread reader. This will probably cause more bugs for a short period of time. Buckle up.

Movies & TV 24/7 via Channel7: Web Player, .m3u file. Music via Radio7: Web Player, .m3u file.

WebM is now available sitewide! Please check this thread for more info.

Anonymous 20/04/24(Fri)06:16 No. 14465 ID: 8bf6d2 [Reply]
14465

File 158770177839.jpg - (123.37KB , 650x650 , 1586038822627.jpg )

Why do people readily accept the idea that quantum computers exist and understand the head-scratching oddities of how they
work (for example, a particle being in 8 different places at the same time), but then when a schizoaffective person details their "hallucinatory" but realistic experiences that defy even lottery-winning odds of happening but regularly do in small time frames that these people look the other way and say it is mental illness and not an act of aforementioned quantum mechanics being put into effect on them? The intent is not to deride people with schizoaffective disorder (or even schizophrenia) but to consider that the experiences of certain "hallucinations" of certain "disorders" are so realistic but unlikely of occurring in nature that it can be comparable to the strangeness quantum mechanics offers. An example of a "hallucination" is the employment of coincidence. One may think of something and others will respond to that thought that relates to exactly that, or someone or something will appear at just the right time after a thought is made relevant to something. These are just brief examples.

What are your thoughts?


>>
Anonymous 20/04/24(Fri)14:38 No. 14466 ID: fca2d4

>Why do people readily accept the idea that quantum computers exist
They do.
>Why do people readily accept the idea that quantum computers exist and understand the head-scratching oddities of how they work.
They don't.

>when a schizoaffective person details their "hallucinatory" but realistic experiences that defy even lottery-winning odds of happening but regularly do in small time frames that these people look the other way and say it is mental illness and not an act of aforementioned quantum mechanics
Because the scientific method cannot be applied to a schizos ho-ho.




Anonymous 20/03/11(Wed)13:30 No. 14437 ID: 1079ad [Reply]
14437

File 158392984376.jpg - (29.93KB , 451x679 , FB_IMG_1583828630853.jpg )

Is this a good life philosophy? Seems very Buddhist. Teal Swan gets a lot of crap but she has a video addressing all the rationalwiki type criticisms and its all very compelling


>>
Anonymous 20/03/11(Wed)15:18 No. 14438 ID: 859947

It's taking from Buddhism but actually the opposite:

Buddhism would be to discard your wants and desires so that you can find inner peace.

She's saying I want X, Y and, Z
Now that I have X and Y I no longer need Z.

Buddishm says you don't need X, Y or Z


>>
Anonymous 20/04/11(Sat)05:30 No. 14460 ID: 2bece6

The elimination of desire, not by satisfying all your immediate desires and then getting bored. The complete opposite of that lol




Murder of cure doctors Corono 20/03/15(Sun)06:22 No. 14443 ID: 9e1522 [Reply]
14443

File 158424974152.png - (316.55KB , 720x1280 , Screenshot_2020-03-14-22-31-17.png )

Money, money is the thing keeping you from dying, the cure for corona virus is scheduled for late 2024. People will pay for the murder and destruction of the corona cure and it's finder
KOS




Anonymous 20/03/13(Fri)06:48 No. 14439 ID: 2b922f [Reply]
14439

File 15840784815.jpg - (10.14KB , 225x225 , imagesuytffbj (1).jpg )

Hey explain yotsubas delima we are as small as a two little robots in in 4 maybe 7 dimensions tied together through cali most Western northern dates possibly a few others then shrunk down to a grain of sand on a grain of sand


>>
Anonymous 20/03/13(Fri)06:50 No. 14440 ID: 2b922f

And there's a universe in all that


>>
Anonymous 20/03/13(Fri)06:52 No. 14441 ID: 2b922f

The god of Mars wants Saturn and I'm trying to break out about 70 maybe movie 2000


>>
Anonymous 20/03/13(Fri)06:52 No. 14442 ID: 2b922f

The alchemical ring




Anonymous 20/02/04(Tue)00:04 No. 14393 ID: 9f02ee [Reply]
14393

File 158077107727.jpg - (65.11KB , 605x733 , bike.jpg )

what did Wittgenstein mean by this
1.13 The facts in logical space are the world.
1.2 The world divides into facts.
1.21 Each item can be the case or not the case while everything else remains the same

The facts in logical space are the world
OK so are we meant to infer from this that An object is the sum totality of all the facts about that object?
So the world is the sum total of facts about everything that makes up the world we live in?
Wouldn't that make it impossible to know what the world is and therefore would make the end of the Tractatus impossible to live up to
I.E. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent

It seems to me that Wittgenstein, throughout the Tractatus makes it impossible to speak about anything but logic. The logic of language in particular. Certainly the world of objects and situations must be impossible to speak of, since no person could know all the facts regarding anything outside of their own thought processes


>>
Anonymous 20/02/04(Tue)13:33 No. 14395 ID: 9f64f0

it's just induction lol




Anonymous 19/08/14(Wed)09:47 No. 14066 ID: acc39c [Reply]
14066

File 156576887435.png - (40.84KB , 296x487 , 43gwr6yh675e437.png )

Atheism isn't evil it's stupid. If you really think all the universe happens magically automatically then you're dumb. Admit it: what turned you to atheism is how ridiculous abhramic religion is, not that there is or is not a spiritual thing beyond our perception and understating.


37 posts and 4 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Anonymous 20/01/13(Mon)19:43 No. 14351 ID: 4c3626
14351

File 157894100071.jpg - (68.88KB , 450x450 , external-content_duckduckgo_com.jpg )

>>14350
Nice to meet you. Now, GET OUT OF MY MIND!


>>
Anonymous 20/01/13(Mon)21:17 No. 14352 ID: 775e77
14352

File 157894665133.jpg - (625.51KB , 2272x1704 , 1181163544000.jpg )

everything spritual is made up lmao


>>
Anonymous 20/01/14(Tue)04:24 No. 14354 ID: c0e2a8

>>14349
I was mostly being facetious, but then again OP deserved it

I USED to pull something on religious people where I'd say "I'm god disprove me" whenever they used faith as an argument

now the crux of what I'm saying is that a god likely exists based on my experiences, and if someone tried to use that argument on me I could argue that I've got experience with direct experience on the topic and that they're no more a deity than I am, which differs from the logic of having to make an argument that if god exists we all make it up, like some sort of evangelion tang machine

I'm more than a little upset about the implications on the topic of free will and whether my choices really mattered and if I'm actually anything more than a tool or puppet at this point especially because of some events that seem to presage later events in my life

the worst part of it is bitch ass synchronicity won't even give me any clear answers on whether I'll get the most basic of desires like a good job or something after taking everything meaningful away from my life in the more philosophical sense

>>14350
well isn't that just wonderful, except after experiencing destiny and the whole god thing I've got the feeling like I'm that little homunculus bastard from FMA stuck in a bottle still so I don't even get to have that one

I mean, at least if it were just the destiny thing I could argue I'm part of the wider universe and there's no consciousness ruling over me even if I don't technically have free will, or if intervention by god happened I'd have the ability to say the world is malleable to personal will but now I don't get either of them
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.




Classical vs contemporary cynicism Anonymous 17/07/24(Mon)23:36 No. 13029 ID: c6a2e5 [Reply]
13029

File 150093217160.jpg - (42.89KB , 480x353 , IMG_4204.jpg )

Were the classical cynics more positive people than contemporary cynics? People use the contemporary word with such disdain. The classical cynics are depicted as people who were humorous and witty hobos. Contemporary cynicism is associated with general distrust of society, while simultaneously, an increased callousness and ability to manipulate society.

Sorry for the English. What do you guys think about this?


6 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Anonymous 17/09/02(Sat)05:20 No. 13090 ID: d5439c

>>13080
Modern society has these hooks.

There's an endless supply of products (medicine, contemporary music, technology) that grab you by your interest and thrust you into the machine. Then, once your mind has been shaped by the machine, the most common kind of escape is a mental breakdown (maybe via psychosis or hallucinogens). Even then, there's never a total escape.

Lots of hobos would just have their laptops stolen and therefore wouldn't be channers. Diogenes would have to register with some kind of State funded service in order to eat.


>>
Anonymous 17/09/02(Sat)05:23 No. 13091 ID: d5439c
13091

File 150432263878.jpg - (138.94KB , 1124x1428 , don't believe in any of that.jpg )

>>13080
>>13090
maybe modern cynics are spiteful towards society, because they have been trapped and shaped into being a certain way that doesn't align with their values


>>
Anonymous 19/12/21(Sat)21:38 No. 14318 ID: 90cb45

>>13029
I'm pretty sure classics were seen as distrustful, callous and manipulative at their times




Anonymous 19/10/24(Thu)18:34 No. 14239 ID: 29bc32 [Reply]
14239

File 157193484850.jpg - (136.87KB , 1024x519 , 41C116E1-4142-477F-9F31-0F7CBB990E37.jpg )

> tfw there are still people who don’t understand the fundamental nature of reality
> like nigga, just read Process & Reality, its not that hard smdh


>>
Anonymous 19/11/05(Tue)07:13 No. 14255 ID: 602775

>George Hegel with out the nebulousness

I'm interested, op.
Tell me more.


>>
Anonymous 19/12/18(Wed)09:45 No. 14311 ID: 7e343d

Physical reality is consistent and understandable through sense data. It's that basic. And morality is objective and can be understood by humans in overall easy to understand terms. This is the state of philosophy. Entirely with no other components linked. lol What do people think about morality or metaphysics? On the topic of morality, I would say wrong things like assault and theft are undeniably wrong and there's no other painting of life that is how things are. Not a single painting anywhere in any case there. lol




Atheism is evil Anonymous 19/02/18(Mon)09:42 No. 13885 ID: 1556f2 [Reply] [First 100 posts] [Last 50 posts]
13885

File 155047936222.jpg - (403.53KB , 1035x732 , 1549204089557.jpg )

>Moral relativism (good or bad cannot be defined as the atheist doesn't acknowledge any authority)
>Meaninglessness (existence is hollow and devoid of values)
>Cult of Self (the own ego is the only thing that matters)
>Scientism (an obsession with science that becomes the only prevailing truth)

If you're a fedora you're pretty much advocating for psychopathy.


233 posts and 91 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Anonymous 20/05/01(Fri)17:13 No. 14474 ID: aef41d

>>14406
Which is precisely why any depiction of God as man has written Him is absurd. This depiction was never supposed to be some lofty unimaginable cosmic being and wise sage of Creation; the ancient poor fucks who wrote the stories that eventually became Scripture did not have that kind of imagination. The best they could come up with was a King. Except... a really super-duper King. A King who could destroy whole cities with a wave of His hand rather than by using an army. In fact (and I quote!) they even called him Lord of Lords.

Rather a bit how like a small child, when asked to describe an authority figure (say, the President) will lack the imagination to do more than come up with a Super version of their own parents.

I wonder how those Bible literalists cope with the fact that humans can do everything OT God did, and more. Plagues of boils? Mustard gas would like a word. Parting of seas? The Aswan High Dam has something to say. Raining fire from the sky? Nuclear weapons have entered chat. Bring a dead person back to life? Doctors do that every day. Ending all of humanity? Well, it won't be to the sound of TRUMPETS, but a billion car exhausts coughing CO2 into the sky will do the job in time.

All that "power" that God had, and His best trick was having a dude turn water into wine? You sad motherfucker, humans had a dude WALK ON THE GODDAMN MOON. And then eleven more dudes after that for good measure. Right now I can hit "reply", and ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD, someone else can read the message that was composed. To ye of little imagination who wrote the Bible, I've got telepathy that can cross continents!

The great works of this so-called God aren't even impressive. Haven't been for centuries.


>>
Anonymous 20/05/01(Fri)17:58 No. 14479 ID: fca2d4

>>14474
>Rather a bit how like a small child, when asked to describe an authority figure (say, the President) will lack the imagination to do more than come up with a Super version of their own parents.

So you're saying that the president doesn't exist because a small child cannot describe him aptly?

Tip harder bro.

>Right now I can hit "reply", and ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD, someone else can read the message that was composed.
"And I made the stars that became the carbon in your mothers ovaries!"


>>
Anonymous 20/06/11(Thu)10:48 No. 14524 ID: 7ddeec
14524

File 159186531430.jpg - (934.82KB , 3845x2102 , FEdora.jpg )

>>13885
>>13927
>>13940
>fedora
I'm sorry did you mean the christian hat?




What would death "feel" like? Anonymous 19/01/21(Mon)06:59 No. 13867 ID: 94a09a [Reply]
13867

File 154805034541.jpg - (51.11KB , 1280x720 , maxresdefault.jpg )

I found this video, loved it, and I thought to post it here. Discuss?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r7wU5dB3mg


>>
Anonymous 19/11/28(Thu)22:03 No. 14286 ID: 68c80a
14286

File 157497499317.png - (143.23KB , 2431x924 , 1f69f2373d9136ed9a061a3a1b64cbffe3abc9b2.png )

We can't feel it nor imagine the feeling homie, our biology doesn't allow us to do it.
Its trying to imagine how X-rays would look like, we can only "see" them because we represent them with the colors we see.
>pic related





Delete post []
Password  
Report post
Reason