/lit/ - Literature

>>13890486
I don't care, and I won't read it

>>13890486
>reads book
>allows themselves to be completely changed and manipulated without question

ok, retard.

>>13890486
i might dld it on libgen, read just enough so that i can make fun of it here, and then delete it

>>13890486
Nice try Daniel

>>13890522
Never see these posts in threads about Goonman, Jesus or Jordan Washyourpeterson

>>13890542
So I'm sure we should be approving of everything ever published and have no preference whatsoever?

You realize you are simply sad because we have a collective preference? That is insane. We have to have a certain identity, or direction. :3

>>13890542
You’re so cute when you get snarky :3

>>13890595
And that's not me. The post above that is me.

>>13890604
>>13890595
Not that you aren't cute, or anything.

But that particular post isn't me

>>13890486
We're all just chemiculs mannnnnn

>>13890568
Observe the White head thread.
>There’s only one of them! He’s a tranny! Lets get him!
You can shove your collective presence up your ass.

>>13890623
Well you don't like trannies either do you?

Do you want to have some certain preferences here? Because I think it's pretty evil to say that you shouldn't be what God created you for. :3

>>13890620
Just what in the body is technically human, anon?
10% I’m told. I guess this makes you dimwitted spiritualists scared

Read a book

>>13890623
*Whitehead
Duh

I don’t like christcucks shoving their fucking agenda down everyone’s throat. This is not a Catholics board

>>13890635
This doesn't make anyone scared. It's nonsense.

I mean, personally, I read posts like these with a huge grin on my face. :3

>>13890646
It's a board that believes in God, Butterfly. I'm pretty sure at this point there is very little sectarian conflict even within the Christian threads.

All Christians, Jews, and Muslims are allied against the non-believers. Faith is an important thing to have.

>>13890486
bach was a hack and a heretic. fuck him

>>13890669
Immigrants go home.

>>13890669
>All Christians, Jews, and Muslims are allied against the non-believers.
umm, no sweaty.

>>13890679
GASP

Are you using our own ideology against US!?!?!?

I guess you'd think that's an intelligent thing to say? As always there is some snarky twist.

I think you are an incredibly intelligent woman. I let you do your thing all the time because I respect free speech.

But I also respect order. And I know that there are certain social traits which create disorder and I can look at the things which caused decay in the Roman empire and compare and contrast. :3

>>13890669
>It's a board that pretends to believe in God because being a reactionary is in vogue
ftfy

>>13890684
Yes? I have faith that we are united against the unfaithful.

>>13890693
Protip: they aren't pretending. :3

You live in an echo chamber which is EXTREMELY hostile towards those who actually believe in a real God, so it's no surprise that you'd think people were being sarcastic.

But no, we're serious.

Another thing: I vehemently disagree with books like The Bell Curve. I think the social Darwinists are also our enemies. They help create a poor environment for happiness. Perspective is key. :3

>>13890695

>>13890721
You are whether you recognize it or not. I have been in countless threads where we unite against any clear sign of atheism. :3

>>13890486
the only author I've read on this topic is Antonio Damasio and he makes a case for consciousness being a tool developed by the millions of cells that make us in their search for homeostasis

Is Dennett's book anything like that?

>>13890728
there's no such thing as atheism. "atheists" are just crypto-protestants.

>>13890707

>>13890486

>>13890669
Can we actually start doing this? I'm all for inter religious conflict, obviously I have some serious problems with the rest of you, but we should try to remember that our common enemy is materialism.

>>13890773
We already do do this. All the fucking time. Just look at this thread. :3

>implying the ego and its own proves anything

>>13890486
DESU though I am on a Dennett kick RN, and he isn't stupid. (Although why is he so smug? )

I don't understand his eliminativist position regarding the Consciousness/ the Hard Question though. I keep reading his work and he keeps acting as if he has debunked Chalmers' ignorant philosophers delusion, but I keep looking for the debunking and don't see it. Am I just a brainlet or does anyone else get this feeling?

Could anyone give a good summary of how Dennett gets around the hard question? I want to stay a materialist, but I keep searching his text for a good Chalmers-debunking with no avail. Any philosophers out here who can help me?

>>13890768
Is that David Chalmers?

>>13890542
Name one thing wrong with anything jesus said or did

>>13890773
I’m down, I have my reasons for being Catholic and I’m sure you have yours for being Jewish or Muslim or Protestant. I just think we should focus on preserving the validity of a theist worldview. Stay strong in your faith, whatever that faith may be anon. God be with you

>>13891191
From what I check last time, Dennett has started to admit there is really something in the Hard problem consciousness. At least from what Chalmers has said recently, hell, even people like Sam Harris admit Consciousness cannot be an illusion and that there is really a Hard problem like Chalmers has been saying for over a decade.
There's a chat between both on youtube.

>>13891235
brother! cease this blasphemy!

>>13890690
butters btfo

>>13891191
>>13891245
To add further. Yeah, the Hard problem is 'hard' for a reason. Qualia is after all one of the biggest refutations of materialism
Saying Qualia doesn't exist or that it is just an illusion solves little to nothing on the matter, it's literally an scapegoat since there is no actual answer to the Hard problem to date, is an unsolved problem afterall.

>>13890522
>Someone shows me proofs of things and explain to me how the world as we perceive it works and I agree with it instead of the autistic metaphysical speculations some ancient pedo greeks thought and only philosophers who do nothing but jack off to their own thoughts all day care about
>"lol you retard"

>>13891191
Dennett's problem is he's rooted and trained in a tradition that posits the only real things are 3rd person objects/events available to all; and this whole endeavor is a pretty dated, insufficient product of its time. Hence Dennett's ideas like "heterophenomenlogy" (not sure what he was thinking with this term).

Chalmer's critique of Dennett is that he is hung up on global reportability / verbal reports, and mistakes these verbal reports and the mechanisms that make reportability possible for consciousness itself. The hard problem says, no, there is a lived-experience that those reports are reports of, and that experience is what needs explanation.

as for staying a materialist, don't worry. all the options currently taken seriously about consciousness, whether it's a dualism like epiphenomenalism or some kind of monism, are pretty much materialistic, or at least Naturalistic (which amounts to just expanding our idea of what matter constitutes). but they would all be considered materialistic explanations 2,000 years ago and there's no room at all for any sort of god, if that's what you're worried about. there's a reason why theists aren't given a place at the table, though I wish all of these old-guard materialists chained the ideas of the 20th century conception of what materialism means who are allowed a place at the table would hurry up and die because they're just dead-weight and a drain of resources.

I bet you'd like Russellian Monism if you haven't already checked that out.