Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network issues. Refreshing the page usually helps. The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact. You are currently reading a thread in /b/ - Random
>>579630840 for whatever reason you want to ask >>579631281 read kant, then heidegger if you feel up for a challenge, popper is a must if youre into science and shit, basically just pick a philosopher and start reading, is there any topic in particular that interests you?
>>579631317 free will exists, i think we can all agree on that on the surface, morality is just a judgement of what someone ought to do or who they ought to act, honestly i dont really understand your question, could you try reframing it for me? >>579631828 yes, why yes he was,
>>579631956 >read kant, then heidegger if you feel up for a challenge, popper is a must if youre into science and shit, basically just pick a philosopher and start reading, is there any topic in particular that interests you? youre not a philosopher kek
if you believe in free will, you're probably not the best person to answer this question then. i'm an agnostic determinist. what i'm wondering about is how determinist philosophers like harris can propose a framework for morality that is independent of free will.
Is there something innate to biological creatures that could never be replicated with technology or do you believe that, with enough time, we could create a computer system capable of learning and reasoning in the same way as humans?
>>579632640 actually im still in school, getting my masters in neurology >>579632801 what then is philosophy? >>579633919 immanuel kant what is enlightenment >>579633306 lol >>579633201 hmmm well then id say there is no morality outside of free will, making good choices implies that you have a choice
>>579634174 >>579634443 haha noted, ya'll make me smile >>579634637 very much so yes, but you gotta realize that our (human) reasoning is the result of millions of years of evolution, technology will definitely need time to close the gap >>579634759 agreed >>579634916 well shit dude i dont really condone cheating at least when both people agree to monogamy, this is not really my area of expertise >>579635080 i dual majored in communication studies, so yeah, they hate me for other reasons, not for my education
>>579635705 its freedom from persecution from the law, implying there is no liberty without government, sad i know >>579635987 sex >>579636007 you mean like plato or earlier? both >>579636287 would you like to supersize that? >>579636295 you're referring to the rift between the mental and the physical realms right? read the critics of solipsism >>579636796 wait so do you feel like you should want to help them? >>579636538 yeah sort of, there are some choices that are heavily influenced by evolutionary predisposition, but for the most part i can still make my own choices
Can't really reconcile free will with what we've learned about our brains and neural networks in general.
Quantum physics doesn't really help either, even though people love to claim it comes to the rescue of free will.
It's either actually deterministic and we just don't understand it well enough yet. Or it really is random... but our brains being slaves to quantum entropy does not free will make. It would merely make for a better illusion.
>>579632394 >free will exists, i think we can all agree on that on the surface And yet you claim to be a Philosophy fag? Are you in high school? You clearly don't know shit about what philosophy has to say about free will, or anything for that matter if you honestly think ANY philosophical issue is something that "we can all agree on"
>>579637631 i partially do >>579638830 i don't mind, philosophy is about the love of wisdom in all its forms and application >>579638113 one idea that i like is the idea that the only true sin is an act of deception, that's why open relationships are a thing,
>>579635527 >hmmm well then id say there is no morality outside of free will, making good choices implies that you have a choice Holy fuck dude, again you clearly don't know shit about philosophy. If it interests you that's great but you should not be acting like you're in a position to answer anybody's questions. There are so many good arguments for moral responsibility without free will...like soooooo many.
You should be asking questions, not answering them.
That's how I feel. Chick I banged at work knows my GF. Still doesn't care. she says "I want fun" but I can see her true wants when I look her in the eyes while i'm inside her. It's not just lust. Problem is, I fell pretty hard for her long before we started fucking.
I'm leaning towards this being my pathetic excuse to destroy my current relationship, deconstruct my life and start over.
>>579641031 dude, i'm clearly not wowing you so leave, i wont blame you >>579641001 not conclusively, but it doesn't keep me up at night >>579641063 i dont think thats a sufficient comparison >>579641076 dude i feel for you man,
>>579642461 >dude, i'm clearly not wowing you so leave, i wont blame you Oh, well now that I have your permission I guess I can leave! My intent was to point out that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. When people who don't know what the fuck they're talking about but act like they do, it makes things worse for everybody, it spreads incorrect information and hinders actual learning. Like I said, you should be asking questions, not answering them.
>>579642845 i'm reading a book on continental philosophy, after this 404s imma get back to reading >>579642849 i agree completely but i'm not really giving out too manny actual facts, i'm giving my opinions and pointing to where others can find better info, >>579642959 i can give you my kik if you want someone to vent to on the reg man, i'll be completely un-judgmental
Why does the quantum enigma fightens you anons? The only thing that I would find frightening about it would be the possibility to someone discover how it works exactly and start influencing everything until he becomes a god.
If my experience transcends yours, how on earth can you believe anything about it?
Your belief about my experience can have no content other than conceptions you have and experience in your own mind, leaving the difference between solipsism and 'not-solipsism' nothing more than a difference in attitudes (such as, taking something to be true or not) you have towards conceptions/ideas in your own mind, that YOU experience. None of which is to do with me and my experience.
Does experience other than my own exist?
Answering "yes" or "no" is nothing more than me taking an attitude towards a conception in my own mind ('experience other than my own'), which I experience.
The opposite to solipsism is not logically conceivable.
How could I possibly form beliefs about something I could never in principle encounter (transcendent experience)?
>>579645640 >>579645831 fellow philosophyfag reporting in just finishing bachelor's >re-teaching your discipline this is what every single person asks me >getting my masters this up for debate in my next decision
>>579630301 So I'm a a Deontologist at heart cause I think it would be the hypotheticaly best system of ethics, in theory. but I don't think it actually reflects how people are. existentialism gives a more accurate assessment of the world as it is, far as I can tell.
What the hell does that make me? Does being a Kantian existentialist even make sense? pretty sure their contradictory...
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.