/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11240875]

WHY THE FUCK WOULD SUBJECTIVE CONSCIOUSNESS EMERGE IN A COLD UNCARING UNIVERSE OF MECHANICAL PHYSICAL LAWS ACTING THEMSELVES OUT

WHY WOULD ORGANISMS DEVELOP THAT HAVE SUBJECTIVE AWARENESS !!!AND!!! THE SUBJECTIVE FEELING THAT THEY ARE IRREDUCIBLY FREE AND SELF-DETERMINING

WHY WOULD ABSTRACT SYMBOLIC LANGUAGE EMERGE THAT IS CAPABLE OF GENERATING CONCEPTS LIKE "FREEDOM" AND "JUSTICE"

WHAT THE FUCK DO I READ FOR THIS?

[Anonymous No.11240883]

Subjective conscious doesn’t exist. It’s an illusion.

[Anonymous No.11240888]

>>11240875
Because God.

[Anonymous No.11240895]

>>11240875
The phone book

[Anonymous No.11240896]

It was useful for us. Also animals lived in less complex environment, so they did not need it as much as man, and they have less ocassion to develop it

[Anonymous No.11240899]

>>11240883
It does exist and illusions also exist they just don’t correspond to the objects in space people think they do

[Anonymous No.11240902]

>>11240883
>It’s an illusion.
Who is being fooled then?

[Anonymous No.11240910]

>>11240902
You are if you think that made-up question has any bearing on the nature of reality.

[Anonymous No.11240918]

>>11240899
It doesn’t exist. Prove that it does.

[Anonymous No.11240930]

I thought like you once. But then I realized that all of that is just an abstraction in our heads. The universe is neither caring or uncaring, it is not neutral, it is not bound to a definition of a constructed language. The universe is the universe

[Anonymous No.11240936]

>>11240910
Good job, you know you can't answer the question because it refutes the entire argument.

[Anonymous No.11240938]

>>11240896
This post is completely incoherant and the syntax reads like that of a pajeet. Stop posting.

[Anonymous No.11240941]

>>11240936
Logic is also an illusion, so it’s an invalid framework to disprove the illusion.

[Anonymous No.11240945]

Fichte's Wissenschaftslehre; Hegel, specifically his early works; you can find them both in English.

>>11240883
>>11240896
>>11240899
>>11240902
>>11240910
>>11240918
Quit discussing things, the OP asked for recommendations.

[Anonymous No.11240948]

>>11240875
It had to happen in one of many infinite possible universes. And if it didn't, well then how the fuck would you know? you wouldn't even BE

[Anonymous No.11240953]

>>11240896
Pseud version of evolution theory

[Anonymous No.11240959]

>>11240918
Every single person as an aggregated identity called a Self, it can be indentified with consistent brain waves and neural activity over time which we can aggregate together and call the becoming Self or the pattern “self” and that is the Self. Its not an object it is is a type of information that emerges from minds looking at themselves from brains self-referencing. It has special status over almost all ther types of physical phenomena because it took 4.5 billion years to develop. You can try to reduce it to atomic parts but its emergent so this would just be begging the question which is what metzinger and dennett do in their work

[Anonymous No.11240966]

Read:
Math textbooks
Books about the Big Bang


Related question: why is there something instead of nothing?

[Anonymous No.11240977]

>>11240959
>every single person has a self
Incorrect. You have no evidence of this.

[Anonymous No.11240979]

Am I here to merely suffer

[Anonymous No.11240983]

>>11240941
Just admit that it's impossible to come to any conclusions about the nature of phenomenological experience.

[Anonymous No.11240984]

>>11240959
>You can try to reduce it to atomic parts but its emergent so this would just be begging the question which is what metzinger and dennett do in their work

So, a gestalt?

[Anonymous No.11240999]

Read Graziano: consciousness is an arbitrary attribution. An AI is immediately conscious and aware if we program it to say that it is.

[Anonymous No.11241017]

>>11240875
Read The Foundation for Exploration to be reborn into an unphasable hyper-conscious ubermensch existing in pure wonder and satisfaction in existing.

[Anonymous No.11241022]

>>11240875
why not

[Anonymous No.11241023]

>>11240883
Consciousness does exist as we all experience it. What doesn't exist is the self. Consciousness is the awareness of our body (including our mind) coming into contact with other bodies and objects. We experience these changes which can either dismantle or strengthen our being. Our perception of these flows are what constitutes our mind. The idea of a self is another level of consciousness that keeps the state of our body in one time causally linked to the state of our body in a previous time. However that causal link is arbitrary, every moment that passes we die and are born again followed by a new desire leading to a new action.

[Anonymous No.11241034]

>>11240875
>WHY WOULD ORGANISMS DEVELOP THAT HAVE SUBJECTIVE AWARENESS
Subjective awareness is awareness lacking the entire context. No organism is strong enough to gather all the necessary data

[Anonymous No.11241042]

>>11240883
>>11240910

[Anonymous No.11241052]

>>11240875
>naturalism
>2018

[Anonymous No.11241059]

Why wouldn't they?
Why do they need an ontological purpose?
Not even arguing pro-nihilism here, but taking "the universe sucks" and using that to extrapolate "there should be no consciousness in the universe" is missing a few major logical steps.

[Anonymous No.11241062]

David Chalmers
Daniel Dennett
Keith Frankish
Andy Clark
Francois Kammerer
Staurt Hameroff
Roger Penrose

Just read their papers on google scholar or whatever.

[Anonymous No.11241066]

>>11240930
unironically made me think

[Anonymous No.11241071]

>Universe produces human beings in addition to a multitude diversity of life.
>abloo abloo boo why universe so cold? abloo bloo boo.

[Anonymous No.11241076]

>>11241023
If consciousness is not causally linked through time does that mean it exists outside of our perception of time? Will consciousness ever be explainable if perception is only gained through a process which defies measurement in a causally based universe?

Also, would consciousness even be possible if it weren't for sensory perception? How could consciousness exist without any information to try and make sense of?

[Anonymous No.11241077]

>>11240875
>Whatever happened? A breach in the very unity of life, a biological paradox, an abomination, an absurdity, an exaggeration of disastrous nature. Life had overshot its target, blowing itself apart. A species had been armed too heavily – by spirit made almighty without, but equally a menace to its own well-being. Its weapon was like a sword without hilt or plate, a two-edged blade cleaving everything; but he who is to wield it must grasp the blade and turn the one edge toward himself.
>Such a ‘feeling of cosmic panic’ is pivotal to every human mind. Indeed, the race appears destined to perish in so far as any effective preservation and continuation of life is ruled out when all of the individual’s attention and energy goes to endure, or relay, the catastrophic high tension within.
>The tragedy of a species becoming unfit for life by overevolving one ability is not confined to humankind. Thus it is thought, for instance, that certain deer in paleontological times succumbed as they acquired overly-heavy horns. The mutations must be considered blind, they work, are thrown forth, without any contact of interest with their environment.
>In depressive states, the mind may be seen in the image of such an antler, in all its fantastic splendour pinning its bearer to the ground.

[Anonymous No.11241079]

>>11240983
He just concluded that phenomenological experience is an illusion. Why are you deliberately ignoring his points?

[Anonymous No.11241080]

>>11240875
How else could God know Himself?

[Anonymous No.11241121]

>>11241076
Consciousness does exist outside of time in a way. Consider that we cannot physically travel backwards in time however we can access memories that link our bodies across large distances of time without having to actually travel back to that point. I think that consciousness is not something particularly unique to humans either. Other animals likely have consciousness as they can experience the flows within their own body and respond to it. What sets humans apart is a heightened awareness of this conscious process. I think that consciousness is explainable through natural phenomena but the self may not be through causation. Consciousness on Earth may have existed in some of the earliest animals who even at the dawn of life had rudimentary senses. Multicellular organisms usually do have some form of sense perception, even trilobites developed simple eyes, therefore I think that they would have had some form of consciousness, as simple as it would have been. These creatures couldn't have understood the complex consciousness that humans have and in the same way we can't comprehend a more advanced animal that has developed an even higher level of consciousness that surpasses the 'self'.

[Anonymous No.11241126]

>>11241077
sauce? i am intrigued, want to refute this as i’ve heard it before and im worried consciousness is a maladaptive mutation

[Anonymous No.11241142]

>>11241126
It's a segment from Zapffe's The Last Messiah.
https://philosophynow.org/issues/45/The_Last_Messiah
I'd like to refute it too but it makes a lot of sense. We evolved through natural selection to be intelligent apes, however that intelligence leads to all sorts of neurotic tendencies not exhibited in the rest of the animal kingdom. Many people kill themselves or simply cannot function due to all sorts of mental phenomena which either doesn't exist or exists in lesser amounts in the rest of the animal kingdom. The major difference that sets us apart from other animals is our intelligence so therefore it must be the culprit.

[Anonymous No.11241236]

>>11240875
>WHY
No such thing as why without subjective consciousness. It doesn't exist beyond the brains of animals.

[Anonymous No.11241311]

>>11241076
>a guy on /lit/ who gets that the kernel of consciousness is an atemporal anthropos
>also gets that it is connected to "physical" reality causally and reality isn't just a veil of maya
>gets that the causal/uncaused are in a relationship we haven't yet explained

Please devote yourself to philosophy at some point in your life and don't get duped into thinking any current philosophical or esoteric system is the correct yet

[Anonymous No.11241428]

>>11240966
>Why is there something rather than nothing?
This is the fundamental question.

[Anonymous No.11241627]

>>11241023
>>11241076
>>11241121

Seriously though, consciousness is an artifact of the attention-sensory loop. Its a caricature, and things like imagination are using that caricaturing system internally from stored sense data. This would be used in survival to model possible scenarios in the habitat. It stays on while you aren't actively surviving and that's where you end up imagining crazy bullshit and filling in details in memories of real events, which are always caricatures. Memory and Awareness are quick sketches of what's really being recorded. That's why white light seems pure and homogenous when in reality it is the messiest muddy color. We make a quick sketch of that cacophony of vision, just as white noise is truly complex but we experience it as a pure blank noise.

[Anonymous No.11241665]

>>11240875
because its the void reproducing its identity with itself as friendship and love

also read zizek, hegel, lacan

[Anonymous No.11241756]

>>11240966
Because if there were nothing you would not be here to ask the question.

[Anonymous No.11241814]

>>11240966
>why is there something rather than nothing?
Nothing is evidently a necessary state, while Something is not, so it must be shown that Something is a necessary effect of Nothing. Something is existence in its various forms, all representations of constraint, while Nothing has no limits, order, or laws. This is ultimate freedom, infinite potentiality. It is unlimited in its potential, yet there is nothing actual. Naturally, limits will be created by the unlimited to become fully actual. Essentially, the unlimited (Nothing) creates the limited (Something). If Nothing did not create, then it would not be unlimited, and therefore be finite, which is something. Thus the creation of Something from Nothing is necessary.

[Anonymous No.11241820]

>>11240883
>Grug need pretend conciousness no exist to reduce dissonance in Grug mongoloid brain