/lit/ - Literature

Not publishing fraudulent images, for one.

Why is there something so sad and unambitious about the highly produced images released by celestial fetishists? Why does their overly pretty imagery seem like it is supposed to mean a great deal more than it does? What does it feel so dishonest? Why do they seem like charlatans?

>>12916562
it's years of effort and hard work for something that's awe inspiring but ultimately pointless and useless. not that different to art.

>>12916543
That's great stuff, but understanding abstract concepts takes a different approach of examination and contemplation.

How can one care about that image?

Didn't we know it already?

Your brain is more complex than that black hole.

The culturalization of science has created a very new form of kitsch, and it is quite a ridiculous one.

>>12916543
This thread –> >>12916496

tfw we are so removed from reality that science is no longer seen as an excursion of a specific philosophical outlet.

>>12916569
How is that "awe inspiring" (kitsch expression, by the way)?

How?

I can look at a tiger for ten minutes, at a movie for two hours, at an opera for five, and at a book for a week, but I can't for the life of me bring myself to look at that black hole for more than a couple of seconds.

Even Rothko is more interesting than that.

>>12916543
>Science will be overrun and clogged up by shocking dilettantism

>>12916543
Philosophy will explain why everything than happens with AI over the next 100 years at minimum is holocaust level immoral. If you're not a moralist, it will explain the actual nature of consciousness to scientists who refuse to listen because they're literally incapable of understanding higher level thought even when it's materialist.

>>12916569
But NASA produces these supposedly important images regularly, tweeting the prettiest nebulae and other objects and planets interspersed with CGI versions of those same subjects and does all this to an extent that really makes me think they're more of a photo editing studio. I think the most interesting investigations about space do not lend themselves to these crude, reductive, silly pixels.

>>12916543
Philosophers will save the muck of capitalism and revolutionize the world.

>>12916543

>>12916616
10/10

>>12916543
Well it recently achieved a composite rendering of the luminous gas surrounding a black hole. "Science" is a type of philosophy, after all. Its autistic little brother.

Radical hermeneutics and weak theology is pretty cool

imagine giving a shit about a hole in the fucking sky whoop dee doo, how's that help me live a better or more meaningful life? that's right it's meaningless bug worship of materialism "oh it's a natural event YIPEE!!" with no questioning of relevance or conception of meaning given to such an object. disgusting shit, makes me sick to my stomach. basically if the masses enjoy it (le science) chances are it's the mental and moral equivalent of cheetos

>>12916543
For the most part we have abandoned any real effort to cultivate the arts and redirected all of our education and energy towards STEM, and disciplines conducive to money-making, like economics and business etc.
That fact goes some way to explaining why all modalities of art and philosophy are pretty much dead in the way, though cultural subversion of all of our traditional institutions is also a huge factor, probably the antecedent one actually.

>>12916543
it long ago postulated what this picture proves: all the light and warmth of our material world will inevitably be crushed into cold, dark oblivion

>>12916587
Why do you write with that "look at me, I'm deep" style? It's annoying as fuck

>>12916616
shit data

>"The majority of the data points were based upon convenience rather than representative samples. Some points were not even based on residents of the country. For instance, the “data point” for Suriname was based on tests given to Surinamese who had migrated to the Netherlands, and the “data point” for Ethiopia was based on the IQ scores of a highly selected group that had emigrated to Israel and, for cultural and historical reasons, was hardly representative of the Ethiopian population. The data point for Mexico was based upon a weighted averaging of the results of a study of “Native American and Mestizo children in southern Mexico” with result of a study of residents of Argentina. Upon reading the original reference, we found that the “data point” that Lynn and Vanhanen used for the lowest IQ estimate, Equatorial Guinea, was actually the mean IQ of a group of Spanish children in a home for the developmentally disabled in Spain. Corrections were applied to adjust for differences in IQ across cohorts (the “Flynn” effect), on the assumption that the same correction could be applied internationally, without regard to the cultural or economic development level of the country involved. While there appears to be rather little evidence on cohort effect upon IQ across the developing countries, one study in Kenya (Daley, Whaley, Sigman, Espinosa, & Neumann, 2003[5]) shows a substantially larger cohort effect than is reported for developed countries."

>>12916749
Go back to chapo

>>12916749
cope

Legalism is the only practical philosophy.

ITT: broke philosophy majors

>>12916587
Maybe because it's a fucking black hole, you pretentious sperg, it's not meant to entertain you like a book or movie.

>>12916543
>even lit is spouting this gay meme
stop interacting with popsci garbo this shit was discovered over a year ago

>>12916749
Can't explain away g-factor intelligence with Flynn effect shit.

>A review of intelligence GWAS hits: Their relationship to country IQ and
the issue of spatial autocorrelation
https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/PifferIntelligence2015.pdf

>The average frequency (polygenic score) of nine alleles positively associated with IQ and proxy phenotypes at the individual differences
level in published GWAS is strongly and significantly correlated to population, or country IQ (r = .91). Factor analysis of allele frequencies
yielded a metagene factor with a similar correlation to IQ (.86).
>tfw you can predict country IQ by looking at allene frequency hits

>>12916928
making money isn't the objective meaning of life

NYEEEEAAH did someone forget to take da lens cap off?

Computers for starts

>>12916764
>>12916906
>>12916954
>get exposed for being lying little shit
>side-NPCs immediatly answer with shorts insults while the main one start another bout of propaganda to hide the fact that he was lying.

>>12916964
Based and Bugspilled

>>12917301
That was maths boi

>>12916543
It has changed me and my perspective on things. Most other things can't do that.

>>12917342
In which way did it change your perspective?

>>12917316
I posted the GWAS stuff because I saw yours, eat a dick.

>>12917316
He is probably samefagging

>>12916928
>NASA engineers swim in cash
If such is the case how come Black Science Negro won't stop whining about the budgets on twitter, inbetween pointing out superhero movie plotholes?

>>12917424
It's hard to put into words. Mine are clumsy and don't give proper respect to me or my experiences. I've had experiences beyond language, in relation to the trinitarian concept of Hegelianism, monarchies, families, Christianity and Western Civilization.
Been a wild ride.

The funny thing is that all people coping and rooting for philosophy in this thread are only doing so because they can’t do math very well.

>>12916543
wait and see

>>12917470
>people who never practiced *skill* can't do *skill* very well
Amaing insight, my STEMfriend.

>>12916543
It described Satan's asshole long before we had a glimpse of it.

>>12916543
For one, it invented the scientific method.

>>12916587
It's hard to tell if you're shitposting.
If you don't understand how amazing this picture is, you just don't know anything about astronomy. And that's ok, if it's not something that interests you, I don't see any problem.
But you should at least stop insisting that this image is boring and not important because you clearly just don't understand it.

>>12917488
>YOU!!... YOU DONT, UGH, GET IT! THIS SHITTY BLURRY IMAGE IS SO AWE-INSPIRING FOR US, YOU KNOW, SMART PEOPLE.
>I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE

philosophy is required to understand things a priori, since an 'object' millions of light years away can be difficult to understand. they really haven't achieved anything in regards to understand what a black hole IS, all they did was take a picture of the light around it. that is indeed a good baby step, but it doesn't matter much

>>12916569
>confirming theories with empirical proof
>pointless

>>12916618
>>>/twitter/

can someone explain to me why you can only support either black hole or philosophy

>>12916543
I know this is a b8 thread, that being said while blind worship of science is stupid, but so is complete dismissal just because it seems relatively irrelevant to some prole's life, both of those stem from materialistic nihilism

It's Okay To Be Black (Hole)

>>12916543
>And what has philosophy achieved as of late?
This pic sums up the Zeitgeist on many levels, I actually like it. So what did philosophy achieved? The interpretation of that image.

>>12916543
Ok, we get it, you don't have enough brain to talk about abstract things with no direct application.

>>12917568
Philosophy isn’t ‘interpretation’ of things, you Moran.

:3

>One gasps to hear scientists swooning over the universe or any part thereof like schoolgirls overheated by their first crush. (Albert Einstein, Karl Popper, Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, many others.) From the studies of Krafft-Ebbing onward, we know that it is possible to become excited about anything - from shins to shoes. But it would be nice if just one of these gushing eggheads would step back and, as a concession to objectivity, speak the truth: THERE IS NOTHING INATELY IMPRESSIVE ABOUT THE UNIVERSE OR ANYTHING IN IT

>>12917582
YES IT IS.

>>12917583
>THERE IS NOTHING INATELY IMPRESSIVE ABOUT THE UNIVERSE OR ANYTHING IN IT
t. Gushes over james söyces 'impressive' prose

>>12916729
>Understanding the nature of the universe has no relationship to how one lives one's life
What are even the last 400/500 years of Western history?

Goes to show once more that „die Wissenschaft nicht denkt“.

>>12917600
It's "[...] denkt nicht."

>>12916587
>can look at a tiger for ten minutes, at a movie for two hours, at an opera for five, and at a book for a week,
It's a pity that the glory of creation doesn't scratch your itch for mindless escapism

>>12917600
It rather shows that /lit/ is full of brainlets

what we can gauge from this thread is that there is a large swathe of humintards are uninterested in anything that doesn't stem from their onanistic elucubrations

>>12916543
HAHAHA Imagine actually think this is real, imagine thinking space is real in 2019.

>>12916729
>how's that help me live a better or more meaningful life? that's right it's meaningless bug worship of materialism
>le posts on le 4chan
*Your* life is meaningless no matter how hard you try and emulate your favorite fictional characters from whatever pseud shir you think is deep.

>>12917614
Earth exists as a kind of spiral coil, viewed from the side as a sphere. A simple illusion, really.

>>12916543
We were done over a hundred years ago.

>>12917625
>philosophy was done over a hundred years ago
>posts picture of a deranged syphilitic continental ''"philosopher''" whose work is only good for a laugh
What did he mean by this?

>>12917633
You'll come to understand soon, brother.

>>12917600
lmao

>>12917622
Interesting, is there any spiral earthists forum I can join for more information?

>>12917470
I'm stem(physics). Nigger

*Pushes you into locker*
Yeah take that you science nerd

>>12917768
based

>>12917768
Based Chad stands atop of philosophoshits and STEMkeks alike, he's the supreme being, the bully, the you're moms fucker

>>12917768
But philosophy doesn't produce Chads. R-right?

>>12917905
Anon...

>>12917845
Philosphers are chads.

>>12917316
>>12917457
samefag

>>12917528
>that pic
is that from the nikon camera guy? theoria whatever. wheeler or whatever his name is

>>12917528
>y-y-you can’t know nuffin without us
cope harder philosophag

>>12917583
I like this guy but he never seemed to fully understand UG Krishnamurti, there is nothing innately anything, and saying there is a lack of meaning or there is a lack of innate impressiveness is meaningless in itself, people who go after the picture of the black hole or the people who enjoy knowing about black holes only reveal something about themselves.
>>12916562
>>12916569
This is scientifically important to physics and astronomy in the sense that you don't have to just assume that's its true anymore, it reconfirms Einsteins general relativity, and other theories regarding black hole and galaxy formation, its radius allows for a calculation of mass which fits the mathematical prediction. I'm not sure how studying and observing Jupiter and it's red spot, taking a picture of Pluto, learning about how solar systems form, how stars form and collapse into black holes, etc. is like art. This is where art draws inspiration from. You're just living in a time where you're privy to this knowledge, if it doesn't impress you that's okay, if you go out of your way in an attempt to devalue it, then it says something about you, the black hole itself isn't making any statements.

>>12916939
>reading books for entertainment

Ask me how I know you're a redditor.

>>12916746
Correct grammar and a rich vocabulary are very challenging things for a typical Anglo, it seems...

>>12917488
I do somewhat understand it. I am not an astrophysicist, but I have read Stephen Hawking, and I do confess his book was a little interesting to me.

However, the image adds nothing to it in terms of aesthetic value, even though, similarly to thousands of other discoveries that are made every single day of the year, it carries some scientific interest.

I doubt you can spend more than ten minutes looking at it. As I said, it is less than a Rothko.

>>12917984
anglo bad

>>12917984
>I do somewhat understand it. I am not an astrophysicist, but I have read Stephen Hawking
popsci was a mistake

REEEE these scientists derive their own subjective value from their work and this hurts my Artistic feelings!

>>12917984
>I do somewhat understand it. I am not an astrophysicist, but I have read Stephen Hawking,
NGHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaAaaaa

Can /lit/ solve this?

>>12918008
God I'm so hungry

>>12918008
Of course my good fellow. Whilst I at the university I did indeed study the integral calculus. This one in particular is a Dirichlet integral, so naturally the answer is one-fourth pi.

>>12916543
Philosophy doesn't have achievements you fucking retard.

>>12918008

>>12918225
Hardest I laughed all day :3

That’s like such an inside joke but it was perfect

>>12916543
The ressentiment in this thread...

People trying to devalue fields of inquiry because they don't understand them or otherwise feel threatened by them. It was not so long ago that philosophy and science were considered more or less the same. Is this a result of the growing esotericism in academia? An anxiety to prove one's field as valid or worthwhile?

OUR SCIENCE GOD IS THE MERCIFUL GOD!
PRAISE BE THE NEWTON, AND HIS PROPHET SAGAN, AND HIS SON DEGRASSE-TYSON AND THE HOLY NYE THE SCIENCE GUY!!!
AT LAST OUR PRAYERS HAVE BEEN HEARD FOR AFTER 60 BILLION$ WORTH OF ALMS THE MAJESTIC GOD OF ASTROPHYSICS (E=MC^2 AMEN!) HAS GRANTED US THE VISAGE OF A GOLD-RIMMED SPACE ANUS!
I SHALL PRINT THIS DIVINE IMAGE IN A4 FORMAT AND HANG IT IN MY APARTMENT SO THE MARVELS OF SCIENCE SHANT EVER LEAVE MY BLESSED MIND (FULL OF LOGIC AND FACTS)

>>12918239
>>12918244
This is your mind on capitalism, a zero-sum game for public funding putting every discipline in competition for one another to prove one's value to capital- making industries

>>12917925
No you're not making any sense, what's the proof? Why am I not a chad right now?

>>12918239
>It was not so long ago that philosophy and science were considered more or less the same.
How do you define "not solong ago"? Heidegger was making his infamous remarks about science in the early years of the last century and positivism was big during the century before that

>>12918244
Please get euthanized

>>12917984
>the image adds nothing to it in terms of aesthetic value

Holy shit why are you such a tryhard. Who the fuck is pretending to care about the image as if it were some kind of Art piece that you'd look at to experience aesthetic emotions? There are a bunch of videos and articles out now explaining what the data making up the image represents and why it matters and why someone would care about it. Kindly toss yourself off.

>>12917604
wrong
t. German

>>12918244
PRAISE BE GOVERNMENT, FEEDER OF NIGGERS AND DENIER OF HUMAN LIFE

>>12918283
Up to the 19th century, fields we would consider "science" would have been grouped together with philosophy. But even in the first half of the 20th century I'd say most scientists and philosophers both saw their endeavors as complementary rather than in competition with one another, barring a few exceptions.

I feel like the antagonistic relationship between the two fields in popular consciousness only really took hold in a major way in these last couple of decades. Even then I'd say the smartest people I've met generally have a healthy appreciation for both fields, regardless of the trappings of either industry as they exist today. Good scientists have curiosity and appreciate a more abstract evaluation and pursuit of knowledge, good philosophers ground themselves in empirical fact to make relevant conclusions.

>>12916543
philosophy is an illusion to disguise and hide nature. you can kill people and it's fine.

https://vocaroo.com/i/s0uRUcydEnZO

>>12916964
Based

>>12918270
t. poorfag

>>12917488
Thank you for being so sensible, anon. :)

Personally I'm not yet well-versed in an understanding of science, but I would like to ideally become so someday, and when I do, I'll better understand the gravity (heh) of artifacts like the above. I currently don't even understand what a black hole is, funnily, but I hope it's at least some kind of portal to another dimension or something instead of merely an infinitely crushing abyss. Anyway, thanks for your rare polite comment on this website and I hope you have a nice day today :) <3

>>12918340
>good philosophers ground themselves in empirical fact to make relevant conclusions.
Too late for that, bro. Multiple philosophers take actual pride in not grounding their thoughts in facts or logic, and lets not get start in how most philosophers of X know as much about X as the average guy in the street.

>>12918270
> capitalism, a zero-sum game
No government is a zero-sum game LOL. Almost no games are zero-sum anyway. But civilization should always have a positive net sum, unless you really think all the citizens are really at war THAT much with each other.

There is generally a net gain of some form of positive liberalized utility. Just fyi

>>12918432
I’m :3 (just so butterfly knows awwww)

>>12917768
i'm not even gay at all but he's so hot, i wish he'd cuddle me and make me feel safe...

>>12916543
is there any actual value to this image? I feel like we've known what it was going to look like for decades - is this just a confirmation of things we already knew or does it have any other value?

>>12917980
This thread is made better by this post. While it feels like humanity has won something like a championship victory with this celestial naturalist documentation, I can't help but feel jealous that far away from our Earth draws so much interest. Often a projection for poptimistic futurists, I don't know how to regard much of the human endeavor that occurs in space. The mechanics of GPS type navigation is amazing, as is rocketry, space walks and all the mathematics and aeronautical parables that sustain people in these incredible feats. But what does it matter when the rest of the project seems quite unseemly, ruinous, poisoned and plundered beyond any conceivable triage let alone rescue. Much of space appears a new vantage point sought by powerful states to one-up their competitors, a new meme to be incorporated into the latest military and police solutions. These projects doubtlessly have more funding and far more savvy technicians and engineers than this comparatively humble black hole project. Sure, they'll fly a fern or an agar plate of yeast into LEO to please the citizens, yet spend inordinately on every technology to crush and rule human beings as investments. I think that our situations are so dire, the dangers around us so great that this news almost seems like a distraction, a way to affirm that at least this much of the system is working, this much of the blob has value etc.

>>12918432
Linearized utility mb

>STEMfriends constantly mock philosophers for producing nothing of practical value
>"Hey, isn't this picture completely useless and bears no practical value? Seems like a huge waste of mo-"
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE YOU DONT GET IT ITS BEAUTIFUL

>>12917984
Thanks for confirming my suspicions. I suppose you only read to regurgitate information to others in an effort to impress them.

>>12918480
Philosophers aren’t mocked because it isn’t “practical”, otherwise historians and archeologists would also receive flak. They are mocked because of nonsensical theories and sophistry.

>>12916587
Likewise, there are many who would look at those things you listed and not give a single flying fuck.

>>12916578

>Your brain is more complex than that black hole

No, no it is absolutely not. Black Holes are incredibly dense with mass, they're essentially reality itself enveloped in on itself. So they're fucking everything that is and will ever be and they can't even be seen by the naked eye either. (a simple feat to itself which we as human beings still cannot recreate with technology)

Your brain, whilst a few pounds or so of little comprehensive spongy biological tissue, is the result or maturation and survival over millions of years. This beast, however, will be around when stars have fucking died and vanished from the universe forever more.

It is simply beyond us and we're barely beginning to scratch the surface. So no.

>>12918588
You're a nigger.

>>12917980
good post

>>12918588
>they're essentially reality itself enveloped in on itself.
you understand this is the most basic insights religions and philosophy are saying since ever?.
science is just the religion adequate to your tastes.

>It is simply beyond us and we're barely beginning to scratch the surface.
we always gonna be in the surface. the beyond is the beyond. humanity never learn. always the same old wheel.
every religion is the hope of ultimate knowledge. all a basic lie. you gotta believe.

>>12918650
Say something and say something with evidence to back that up are two different things. If I just randomly blurt that humans can move objects with their minds because I saw it in a dream, and a million years into the future humans will learn to move objects with their minds, that won't make me a prophet or the originator of telekinesis.

>>12918427
>Multiple philosophers take actual pride in not grounding their thoughts in facts or logic, and lets not get start in how most philosophers of X know as much about X as the average guy in the street.

Sam Harris doesn't count as a philosopher.

That picture isn't fake but you would learn it's meaningless once you learn about the method used to obtain it

>>12917604
On its own yes, but not as a subordinate clause

>>12917471
I can't wait to see what Jordo "I never crack a smile" petermeme has to tell me about happiness lol

>>12918534
Historians and archaeologists get flak too

>>12917984

oof

>>12916587
They didn't take that picture for artistic edification you silly retard

>>12916543
>And what has philosophy achieved as of late?
nothing.

continental philosophy in particular has collapsed and stagnated for decades now. its epistomology has become so broken that all they can do now is teach us to hate eachother based on racial and sexual identities. based on what ive seen before, i predict the continentals in this thread will dismiss the black hole finding as irrelevant and not addressing fundamental human desires or isnt real reality or some shit. of course they fail to comprehend that humans absolutely have a desire for understanding and learning about the world around them, something that their failed epistemology prevents them from realizing. Unfortunately, the black hole image doesnt have any commercial applications, otherwise we would get to see the continentals bitch about capitalism too.

The fact is that science routinely captures the imagination of the entire world. It reliably makes our lives better. and it reliably produces progress. Something that 200 years of counter enlightenment tradition is incapable of doing. it has only produced hatred, violence, and suffering.

>>12918782
>It reliably makes our lives better.
oh no no no no

That is one of the shittiest and most uninspiring photos I’ve ever seen

>>12918785
why aren't you grateful for all of the scientists that made shitposting on /lit/ possible?

Just another CGI composite image produced by NASA government niggers to propagate the myth of outer space.

>>12918898
well when you put it that way...

>>12918800
Why aren't you grateful for all of the scientists that made your great grandchildren obese androgynous queers

>>12918708
explain more

>>12918950
well, a woman did it for starters

>>12918676
in old times they saying the evidence is in "the bible" or some byzantine theory. (some say it still...) materialism dont prove anything. your photo dont explain anything better.
i know it sounds crazy, i cant explaining better.

>>12918960
who cares?.

>>12918976
(((You)))

>>12918690
Look at any marxist philosopher.

>>12918988
how is dialectics not logic?

>>12916964

I hereby declare Bugspilling as the new meme

>>12918898
Conspiracy theorist here - can someone please disprove this anon? I myself am only now beginning to crawl up from the conspiratorial rabbithole, and need help in discerning truth from falsehood. I have believed "space is fake" for some time now, including that the Earth is flat. I no longer hold these positions, but I also am not positive on their opposites - that space is real, and the Earth a sphere. I want to do my own research, instead of blindly imbibing secondary narratives, and come to my own stance on the matter. Can any of you please help me believe that outer space is not fabricated, and all the photographs of planets, constellations, the sun and so on are all legitimately what they present themselves to be?

>>12919022
Read about Parallax.

>>12919004
>how is dialectics not logic?
It is quite literally not logic, but rather a set of assumptions from which logic may be used to result in conclusions. The issue is that it is used to reach conclusions that aren't actually true by any observable metric, which leads to a breakdown of the system since it is supposed to result in accurate predictions of reality.

>>12918588
>longevity and complexity are directly comparable

>>12918588
>Your brain, whilst a few pounds or so of little comprehensive spongy biological tissue, is the result or maturation and survival over millions of years.
evolution has fallen out of favor amongst biologists. you'd know this if you bothered to stay current with the literature. it never made any sense to begin with.

>>12919148
Here is your (You).

>>12918008
5pi

>>12919148
What is the new worldview then? Serious question, non-science person here.

>>12919250
secular creationism

>>12919250
>What is the new worldview then?
it's unclear.
https://evolutionnews.org/2016/12/why_the_royal_s/
>The technical literature in biology is now replete with world-class biologists routinely expressing doubts about various aspects of neo-Darwinian theory, and especially about its central tenet, namely the alleged creative power of the natural selection and mutation mechanism.

>>12919268
yeah anon this looks like a completely trustable and unbiased source

>>12919268

>The articles published atEvolution Newsare copyright by Discovery Institute and/or the respective authors and shouldn’t be republished without permission.

Ok cool

>>12919282
https://royalsociety.org/science-events-and-lectures/2016/11/evolutionary-biology/
go read the primary sources then.

>>12919290
you linked me to a scientific meeting. no where does this say or even suggest that there's been a paradigm shift as strong as the one you're suggesting

>>12919308
what are you talking about?
click the "show detail" buttons by each date. Read the abstracts.

>>12919250
The same as the old one. The guy you are replying to is just a fundie.

>>12919318
god fucking fuck you're dumb

>>12919290
>>12919308
that website appears to be an intelligent design newsletter of some sort. in other words, the poster is intentionally lying to you (continental philosopher lying? shocking, i know)

>>12919318

They're talking about an evolutionary synthesis, that is, an extension of the evolutionary theory. At no point do they even suggest that they have debunked the theory of evolution altogether

>>12919331
>Developments in evolutionary biology and adjacent fields have produced calls for revision of the standard theory of evolution
its literally in the first paragraph.
>>12919333
>the royal society is an intelligent design newsletter.
ok.

>>12916590

Source?

>>12917470
>not being a philosopher mathematician in the tradition of Pythagoras, Plato, Leibniz and many others

>>12919348
>>Developments in evolutionary biology and adjacent fields have produced calls for revision of the standard theory of evolution
Exactly, which doesn't mean that the scientific community is abandoning the theory of evolution. Can you read?

>>12919363
you're too much of a partisan to discuss this with.
why are you afraid to challenge what you learned in your 10th grade biology class?

>>12919372

Define partisan

>>12919379
a strong supporter of a party, cause, or person.

>>12919372
lol

Why does everything always have to be a competition? Fucking elitist STEMtards and philosophy/religionfags trying to „win“, as if the untangling of reality is just some banal game in which you have to be better at than the „clearly retarded other side“, while being blind to the fact that their views could compliment each other to gain a higher understanding of the nature of existence itself
I‘m so tired of this petty arguing, I really need to get off the internet

>>12919268
Personally I consider both creationism and subsequent Darwinism to be true, as well as panpsychism - i.e both consciousness and intellect are transcendent, immaterial, fundamental, universal properties of all realities, and not mere, accidental byproducts of mechanical interactions. To claim so is to be unable to even trust one's own mind, since you have no transcendent, metaphysical structures of logic to serve as the grounds of understanding - your mind is an accident of nature, your every thought from that mind is an accident of the mind, and your thoughts of the concept of accidents are themselves only accidents again - accidents, accidents-squared, accidents-cubed. Nowhere in such a paradigm is one left with any certainty of any kind - indeed, one must concede the concept of "certainty" to itself be another accident. The Cambrian Explosion shows that "appearance of highly-complex lifeforms" is true of reality, while abiogenesis has nothing empirical to substantiate it. Initial creationism, subsequent evolutionism. This said, I don't believe in any of the world's religions, and therefore don't believe the Creator behind said Explosion to be the Christian God, Allah, or anyone else we'd name. It might not even be God - perhaps simply a higher-intelligence that we cannot fathom the nature of.

Either way I think Lloyd Pye is brilliant and correct in his view that the Earth is being terraformed, and that our own species is a hybrid of extraterrestrial humanoids and Earthly hominids.

>>12919385

Does that include religion? Because that would make you partisan

>>12919401
im not advocating intelligent design.
my point is, and this is undeniably true, that many leading biologists are admitting the fact that the random mutation/selection mechanism is not sufficiently creative for organisms to speciate

>>12919348
>revision = abandonment

>>12919392
Good post anon, don't worry, I feel exactly as you do. People can turn anything into a tribal identity, and it's quite sad in cases like this where fields designed to uplift our species are brought down to such depths by those of the lowest character.

>>12919396
Eerily similar to my own views, anon. Actually really really bizarre to see someone else echo my own opinions back to me when I've yet to tell anyone of these notions. That's awesome, I guess. Sadly ideology has crept in to the scientific doctrine and the relevant parties within this sector can only divide themselves into the binary camps of "TOTAL RANDOMNESS" versus "PERSONAL SKYDADDY" - and the whole inquiry into reality is therefore stained with irrationalism. I wish there were more scientists and philosophers promoting views like that of "you are the universe looking out through its own eyes" and the like.

>>12919396
good post, the cambrian explosion does indeed frazzle me when i think on it

>>12919412
>my point is, and this is undeniably true, that many leading biologists are admitting the fact that the random mutation/selection mechanism is not sufficiently creative for organisms to speciate
EvoSynth(the thing they are defending) sees itself as an expansion of evolutionary theory, not a rejection of it, and is far from popular or mainstream among biologists.

>>12919256
unironically, i can dig it. but it doesn't give us anything new to live our lives by, and in many ways therefore wouldn't change much about our world

>>12919022
Take some physics courses

>>12916543
you’re not going to get a real answer because no one here keeps up with contemporary philosophy, at least the kind “parallel” to the hard sciences that produced pic related. only professors with tres through the mire for that. shits absolutely boring, if we’re talking the endless peer-reviewed journals articles published every month. ive tried to keep up with it, trust me.

>>12919447

That makes three of us
Really feels nice to not be completely alone with these views, even if it’s just some strangers over the internet. I wish I could talk to my friends about these topics, but they either don‘t really care about These kind of things at all or they fall into the „everything is random and if you think otherwise you‘re obviously retarded“-camp. I‘m always baffled about how many people don‘t care at all about the nature of reality, why we exist and why we‘re conscious.

>>12919560
based poster, can you go into detail about humans being a hybrid species, I have a serious suspicion that the "higher model" of humanity you see people essentialize in the ariyans came here on a rock (there's something about how "personalized" white or otherwise "ariyan" features are, especially around the face, while the faces of aborigines are just barely able to keep themselves from lapsing into the earth), while Evola's "lower" types are natives to the soil. would explain a lot of fundamental difference in disposition, self-sacrifice and self-transcendence vs. hedonism and an allegiance to the earth

how would you respond to Whitehead's notion that what precedes consciousness is not more consciousness, but relation/relatedness? what would you say to the idea that conscious is just an extremely complex manifestation of a universal phenomenon - that is, the self-relating of the Whole? I had to shit out the panpsychismpill after I read Whitehead

All philosophy has done is ruin science... Fucking Marx applying Hegel's masturbatory inaccessible German tripe to economy and "seizing the means of production" setting society back millions of years in an intra-war of struggle, strife and jealousy...

Fuck

Gentlemen, this is the scientific method manifest. GET YOUR HAND OFF MY PENIS. Why did you do this to me? For what reason? what am I being exposed to these pictures for? for believing in a god? A succulent Christian God? I see that you know your word judo well. This. Is. Science. Manifest.

>Darwinism is randomness
So this is the famed intelligence of /lit/, the smartest board on 4chan

>>12919599
Hobbes was right about pre-civil society... People lived in a constant state of war and fear. Marxism has done exactly that... set society back to the stone ages... because no-one agrees to the social contract anymore... liberals think they're getting fucked by racist idiots who vote conservative and conservatives only care about corporate interest... and conservatives think liberals are homo pussy who act like useful idiots bringing over people from retarded 3rd world shit holes and using the government to restrict their rights and bankrupt the country

Rousseau the french faggot WRONG yet again... get out of here god damn Nobel Savage bullshit... so called philosopher cannot even look around him to extrapolate beyond recorded history (not like he needed to)

>>12919625
/sci/ and /his/ are the smartest boards

>>12919642
The average IQ of /sci/ has dropped at least 2 standard deviations in the last few years. and they weren't geniuses to begin with.

>>12919650
That's /r9k/ and /pol/ leaking because they keep posting female-related or race & I.Q. but they always get flamed

>>12919588

I‘m sorry, but I‘m not really familiar with Whitehead. Where would you recommend should I start with him?

>>12918745
Anon, they at least get with some lub

>>12918922
Because that was the work of gender studies and other humanities niggers

>>12919625
It entirely is, though? There is no basis to say that the development of any biological entity at all has to have occurred (and all adaptations after their existence are indeed accidental) or that the universe itself must exist at all. Tell me, what within the Darwinian paradigm is "certain", rather than "contingent"? Not the Universe, not biology, not the mind, not consciousness, not anything. That does mean that everything within it rests on the ground of "randomness".

>>12919767
Mutations are random, but which mutations are selected for is entirely determined by the environment.
Non-selected mutations are entirely irrelevant because they die off, so in effect the only part of the process that matters is the deterministic part.

>>12919791
Yes I know, but I'm saying the very existence of an environment, and the specific nature of it, are similarly all random. There is no concept of "necessity" anywhere in a purely Darwinian view, everything rests on a ground of arbitrarity and contingency. Similarly one can go further and say the Big Bang, if you support that, was not a "necessary" event, and therefore must conclude that literally everything existent is only a compounding of arbitrary accidents.

>>12919814
>therefore must conclude that literally everything existent is only a compounding of arbitrary accidents.

And what is the problem with this ?

Plus, it's not discard completely the possibility of natural evolution be true and certain species/populations had been subjected to artificial selection (like we do with domestic animals) by some source of higher/superior entities

>>12919878
It means the very concept of "contingency", which can only meaningfully exist in tandem with the concept of "necessity", is itself mere contingency. It means we can't even trust our own minds, and of their manner of understanding reality, because they are not grounded in any kind of metaphysical structures of logic. We can only say that everything we presently are is merely the product of what had worked for our ancestors and therefore passed down to ourselves - such as my belief that I'm conscious, that A=A, that 2+2=4, that "evolution is true", and anything else I could name - and not any sort of ultimate, fundamental truths on reality's nature. This is an extremely big deal, as it basically negates any possibility for or existence of a worldview-of-truth, making all our efforts at best only a practical endeavour, that which "works" for our purposes, and nothing anymore transcendent than that.

>>12918772
Then why'd they go out of their way to colorize it?

>>12919928
The fisics can work simply because it's the way that the universe setle down after started and that it could easly have been diferente or that it is the only stable form of existence, with no need for a "necessity" or a metaphysical structure.

All logic, math, science philosophy and whatever more are probably just mechanisms (tools) that we/our minds use to organise the information it's capt in a consistent manner, the fact that we end up with a model capable of accurate prediction may simply be that we get right enough about reality.

Their no need for a great transendental truth of the universe.

>making all our efforts at best only a practical endeavour, that which "works" for our purposes, and nothing anymore transcendent than that

No problem in that

>>12916569
>>12916599
>>12916587
>>12917488
is this picture important because black hole is like black body - it cannot be seem by eye?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_body

>>12919930
so you can see the event horizon dumb-dumb

It’s a big hole in the sky, so what? Scientific materialism might be vaguely interesting but what does it contribute? All it asks is how these irrelevant things work and what they are made of, but it dosent care to ask why. It’s utterly useless, it has no soul. It’s like looking at a beautiful painting and trying to understand the elemental composite of its paint rather than asking what inspired the painter to make it. It’s just boring and banal.

>>12920243
>elemental composite of paint
>painters inspiration
Maybe both of those things are worth understanding, anon...not one or the other...

>>12916964
based and underrated

>>12920243
can't fathom being so dull

>>12920277
Which would you choose, if you could only understand one?

>>12920284
Not an argument

>>12920306
>gets accused of being dull
>replies with the most possibly dull of responses
damn

>>12916582
kek

>>12920243
Maybe because someone wanted to see how this shit is ?

things don't aways need a pratical reason or a direct pratical aplication anom

>>12920318
facts don't care about your feelings, honey

>>12916964
based bugsposter

>>12920333
Yeah, sure, it’s vaguely interesting. It’s not the transcendent discovery it’s pedaled as thought. There’s nothing impactful about it.

>>12920357
>It’s not the transcendent discovery it’s pedaled as thought.
maybe not transcendental or insightful for you

>There’s nothing impactful about it.
nothing impactful or relevant for your life, and?

>>12920292
Personally the latter, but understanding the former would help facilitate the latter in itself, allowing for quality and variety of paint to even exist for the artist to use at all. Again, not a binary. Interdependent, moreso. Why do you have to put down one segment of reality and exalt the other, and not see the system as a whole, and these its parts?

You ask about what scientific materialism contributes...the answer is many things. This website, the device you presently access it through, the myriad medical advances that have vastly improved your quality of living, and so much more I can't include here. Why must you be hostile to a field that has benefitted you so much, and only continues to? Why not criticize the specific aspects you do not respect, without disparaging the whole enterprise?

>>12916587
1000 iq post

>>12916543
That's a bad comparison, because philosophy does not operate like science. It tends to raise more questions the further it progresses, but they are stimulating questions that the Average Joe can't be entrusted to come up and supply humanity with.
It's not a zero sum game, scientific advancements don't take away from philosophy and the other way around, but for some reason, certain science speakers act like philosophy has been overturned once and for all, even though most philosophical problems aren't even on science's radar and are broader in scope.

>>12917469
Literally a puckered, blurry asshole.

>>12920243
>being that interested in some faggy artists motivation
kys