/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12083211]

>my favorite philosopher is Sam Harris
What type of person do you imagine?

[Anonymous No.12083219]

BASED AND OUGHTPILLED

[Anonymous No.12083226]

southern kentucky state alumnus basedface 33 year old graphic designer with a kid he doesnt want or know how to raise

[Anonymous No.12083242]

someone who doesn't spend a lot of time on 4chan

[Anonymous No.12083247]

>>12083211
i don't even know who that is

[Anonymous No.12083303]

>>12083247
some dumb atheist with an MD in Neurology who's part of the same gang as Hitchens and Dawkins, and who significantly overlaps with Peterson in terms of audience

[Anonymous No.12083308]

>>12083211

a person who posts on /lit/ every single day about how much he hates Sam Harris, and uploads YouTube videos titled "Sam Harris DESTROYS liberal snowflakes"

[Anonymous No.12083318]

>>12083308
What does he look like? How does he wake up in the morning? How does he go to bed? What else is he filling his days with? I need to know.

[Anonymous No.12083321]

>>12083318
Basted question anon

[Anonymous No.12083323]

>>12083308
Why would he (and its definitely a male) upload pro-Harris videos if he hates Sam Harris?

[Anonymous No.12083328]

>>12083211
My favourite philosopher is this guy who wrote a book a while ago.

Also I'm intelligent because I read fiction.

Who else here intelligent?

I study humanities.

[Anonymous No.12083330]

>>12083211
Someone who writes his own eugoogly while he's still alive.

[Anonymous No.12083337]

>>12083330
Can't write your own eulogy when you're dead, can you faggot?

[Anonymous No.12083352]

Why is his face so asymmetrical?

[Anonymous No.12083355]

>>12083352
because lizard factories always mess up panel gaps

[Anonymous No.12083357]

stem major

[Anonymous No.12083372]

>>12083337
Deut. 34:5 So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord.
6 And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.
7 And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.
8 And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days: so the days of weeping and mourning for Moses were ended.

Written by Moses

[Anonymous No.12083378]

>>12083372
okay?

[Anonymous No.12083384]

>>12083303
>lumping Dawkins in with these plebs
nice try there, sudo

[Anonymous No.12083455]

>>12083211
Fedora hat wearer in middle school
Harris is okay but if he's your FAVORITE then you need to read more in general

[Anonymous No.12083546]

>>12083211
a disgusting fucking pedant

[Anonymous No.12083557]

>>12083455
>Harris is okay

[Anonymous No.12083566]

You'd have to be retarded to think he's a philosopher in his own right
t. Avid listener

[Anonymous No.12083592]

>>12083211
An imbecile

[Anonymous No.12083594]

>>12083211
somebody who listens to artists such as kanye west, frank ocean and other girly RnB rappers... who follows the official NASA twitter account on twitter... who wholeheartedly engages in discussions on reddit.com... who runs his own "science & technology" discord server... etc I guess lol. In general I'm talking about people who have this weird fetishism over society particularly its most autonomous & utilitarian aspects things like STEM Elon Musk universities various industries STEM etc... always european.

[Anonymous No.12084106]

>>12083303
>significantly overlaps with Peterson in terms of audience
Harris comes across as a scientific materialist hard atheist while jp seems more truth oriented.

[Anonymous No.12084648]

>>12083211
someone under 20 who has never read anything else

[Anonymous No.12084680]

>>12083226

Based and redpilled

[Anonymous No.12084853]

>>12083303
>MD in Neurology
Sam harris has a BA in philosophy and PHD in neuroscience (which he shouldn't have)

[Anonymous No.12084856]

>>12083219
based and ispilled

[Anonymous No.12085442]

>>12083323
accelerationism

[Anonymous No.12086052]

>>12083211
>Sam Harris
Typical anglo empiricist, minus moral relativism.
Could be worse, pic related.

[Anonymous No.12086058]

>>12083303
>who's part of the same gang as Hitchens and Dawkins
The "horsemen of atheism" was just a marketing thing, because they by chance published books at the same time, they didn't even know each other and hated each other's politics. Harris in particular dislikes being known as "the atheist guy", while the others embrace it. Fuck, he's been on spiritual retreats in India and studies Buddhism.

[Anonymous No.12086988]

Harris doesnt understand basic philosophy, in fact he completely disregards it

[Anonymous No.12087000]

>>12083211
Someone from my cringe compilation.

[Anonymous No.12087053]

>>12086052
>gross chauvinistic ideas about women and the non-western world
cringe

[Anonymous No.12087054]

>>12083211

[Anonymous No.12087082]

He's so slimy and jewish and disgusting. He started his writing career by counter-signalling religion right heavily right after the 9/11 attack. He writes retarded claims about how science proves we don't have free will, by citing potential experiments he imagined but have never been done. He thinks that religious people believe that the soul is a physical thing, probably because he himself knows nothing at all about metaphysics. I heard him say that he thinks his highest purpose in life is to have as many offspring as possible, as if he was some kind of mollusc or cancer cell. I heard him on Joe Rogan's show present a retarded thought experiment where he travelled back in time and "altering decisions" he had already taken, completely disregarding that no such thing is possible. He's such a hack and is OBVIOUSLY in it for fame and money, just like that british guy who calls himself by the name of Sargon of Akkad the persian emperor. These kind of people really annoy me because of how they masquerade as wise men but are really in it for fame and money. This is the kind of person that Plato called a "sophist" and warned us so much about. Fucking fuck this guy.

[Anonymous No.12087087]

>>12083211
A good person who hasn't gone far enough with their ethics.

[Anonymous No.12087092]

>>12086988
Can you show me where?

[Anonymous No.12087099]

>>12087092
Google "Sam Harris is ought Twitter"

[Anonymous No.12087103]

>>12087087
No part of him is good. He is the devil in disguise. He lives off of hating God and denying that God even exists. I only found out about him because my friend tells me he says smart things but never actually told me what those smart things were. I look him up and behold, it's one of Satan's minions actively leading people astray.

[Anonymous No.12087134]

>>12087099
In my opinion, this doesn't show he knows nothing about philosophy. It shows that we can have objective truths without anything a priori

[Anonymous No.12087142]

>>12087103
I don't really believe you meant what you said, but regardless I'm confused as to why you would say he is evil. He wants to do all the same good things as the best religious person, it's just he starts in a different place with values rooted in humanism.

[Anonymous No.12087151]

>>12084106
Yet Peterson is just as much of an atheist as Sam.

They are both moronic. Go for the thinkers who understand and support the real existence of God, scientifically and historically. Don’t fall for the atheistic academic program

[Anonymous No.12087166]

>>12087151
This was a good post. I advice everyone to stay far away from atheists, humanists and "intellectuals". If you want to know God read Aristotle or Thomas Aquinas.

[Anonymous No.12087173]

>>12087166
Why would anyone want to know a god who lets all this awful shit happen on earth?

[Anonymous No.12087208]

I imagine someone who's 16-22 and is kinda smart but knows fuck all about philosophy or any non-STEM subject. Probably has a R*ddit account where he unironically upvotes TED clips. Atheist, positivist, liberal, etc. Yuppie parents usually.

[Anonymous No.12087227]

>>12087166
>t. someone who recently got memed into rcia

[Anonymous No.12087242]

>>12087173
I would like to say that God is an active force in this world. If you pray for something, he will give it to you

[Anonymous No.12087311]

>>12087242
I've been praying for all the horrible suffering and injustices to go away my whole life but they are ever present.

[Anonymous No.12087361]

>>12087311
They have most likely receded and you were just ungrateful.

Either that or your suffering is something material, like being born too short or too tall, or having low IQ. The former is no issue, the latter is a socially constructed phenomenon that doesn’t matter as long as you have faith in God

[Anonymous No.12087383]

>>12087361
A child dies of preventable causes every five seconds.

[Anonymous No.12087618]

>>12087383

[Anonymous No.12087622]

>>12087383
Because of Satan, not God

[Anonymous No.12087623]

>>12087622
cope

[Anonymous No.12087633]

>>12083211
someone who throws pseudo science around because he saw a few documentaries on netflix and feels enlightened even tho they never left their home state

[Anonymous No.12087719]

>>12087622
>implying satan has power over god

my sides

[Anonymous No.12089079]

>>12087719
Only because Satan was divine. He has a bigger chunk of Gods heart than any of us do.

[Anonymous No.12089091]

>>12089079
then why don't we worship satan?

[Anonymous No.12089097]

>>12087311
>implying God doesn't suffer
Why is suffering bad per se?

[Anonymous No.12089100]

>>12089097
Because if the worst suffering for everyone isn't objectively bad then I don't want to talk to you. Unless you can show otherwise.

[Anonymous No.12089104]

>>12089100
Have you ever read a compelling story that didn't contain suffering/conflict? Is it possible to have growth without suffering?

[Anonymous No.12089105]

>>12089091
Because Good triumphs over Evil

[Anonymous No.12089106]

>plebs still struggling with theodicy
Plato solved this 'problem' which you'd know if you read a book

[Anonymous No.12089111]

>>12089104
Yes, it is possible to have growth without the Holocaust and rape and murder and child abuse and spouse abuse and addiction.

[Anonymous No.12089117]

>>12089091
but we do anon, we make little moral offering daily to him. We might not be invoking his name, but our bad choices are like ill sacrifices to him. A lie here, a theft there, etc.

[Anonymous No.12089127]

>>12089111
Imagine removing all suffering. No pain, no remorse, no lost love, no violence, no addiction, no death etc. All the bad things gone, poof.
How would we conduct ourselves? What happens to free-will? Imagine your day today and strip out any moment of suffering you had experience; what's left?

[Anonymous No.12089130]

>>12089127
Heaven.
Shows you why reality is a war of good and evil and why the Koran is most likely the word of God

[Anonymous No.12089135]

>>12083211
This type of "person".

[Anonymous No.12089152]

>>12089130
Sounds like hell if you play it out. A purgatory. A limbo.
While that reality would be heavenly, you'd be static. No growth, no change. No humanity.

[Anonymous No.12089288]

>>12089127
Did I say that we should remove all suffering? Obviously, the best world imaginable would include growth. My point is to say that there certainly is objectively bad suffering.

[Anonymous No.12089314]

>>12089288
>objectively bad suffering
That's where it gets tricky, especially with regard to the causality of good outcomes. For example, a sinner committed heinous suffering on another, only to feel the a tremendous guilt himself and change his life to eventually become a saint. If he never inflicted that suffering, he would never have felt guilt, which was the impetus to improve his moral standing. In an odd way, his life's story becomes sanctified as a whole, suffering included. Much like Luke Skywalker wouldn't have had the impetus to follow Obi Wan if his aunt & uncle weren't slaughter by the Empire; he wouldn't have become the Jedi that took down the Empire.

You then have the problem of defining objectively bad suffering. Is murder always bad? What if it is to a tyrant? Is hunger bad? What if it is a response to a society that ignorantly killed off all their skilled farmers out of spite? I'm not advocating moral relativism, just moral causality and fulfillment; that we should reevaluate the nature of suffering rather than a purely negative attribute to the human condition. To me, the only suffering that can be objectively bad, is suffering that is meaningless in reflection.

[Anonymous No.12089440]

>>12089288
>My point is to say that there certainly is objectively bad suffering.
Care to point some out?

[Anonymous No.12089483]

>>12087087
I used to think he was a good guy but the longer I listened to him the more I realized his compassion was really just a mask for a kind of dark hatred for theists. He gets good guests, is a good interlocuter, but he is the perfect examplar of "slave morality".

[Anonymous No.12089877]

>>12083211
Amazing atheist type. Hedonistic and arrogant. Probably a philosemite as well.

[Anonymous No.12090166]

>>12089440

An example might be if each of us secretly tortured every other generation of our children to death. Bad suffering would be making someone miserable with no purpose other than to make them miserable and to never let anyone learn from it. Imagine the Toolbox Killer except for nobody ever finds out.

Honestly, I think all suffering is bad on its face, but it's when we contextualize the suffering that it can become a good thing (for some people working-out is suffering in the moment yet it's ultimately good). Objectively bad suffering comes when we contextualize the qualia and it turns out there was nothing to be learned and no meaning to take. Sometimes people have a horrible time and that's all it is.

>>12089314

Yes, murder is always a little bit bad, simply for the fact that the murderer has to either feel good about murdering another person with hopes, dreams and desires or live with the torturous memory of killing someone they found sympathies with. Regardless of the murderer's feeling, sometimes murder is better than not murder. It's like giving birth. Sometimes it's the best thing for yourself andthe world but it almost always hurts.
I just had the morbid thought that giving birth might not be great in our context and that it might even be better to kill an evil person than to give birth to a good one. Should we be out there trying to kill evil like the US military? Kill evil is such a funny idea. To me, it almost sounds like "kill triangles." Is it possible to "kill evil?"

[Anonymous No.12090214]

>>12090166
>An example might be if each of us secretly tortured every other generation of our children to death. Bad suffering would be making someone miserable with no purpose other than to make them miserable and to never let anyone learn from it. Imagine the Toolbox Killer except for nobody ever finds out.
So your example is a hypothetical? Can you give a real world example? Also, why is this bad? Pls show working

[Anonymous No.12090255]

nobody in academia takes him seriously in his own field, philosophy, or psychology so he has to build his shit up by playing to emotions. he even insults academia in his books because he knows he's out of his weight class

sam harris literally wants to be dawkins so bad he goes out of his way to try and write statements to trigger people.

actual person i imagine: atheist, vegan, deterministic, depressed, someone who has no thoughts of their own on most subjects and their shit can be directly traced to either sam harris or dawkins or another one of those clowns

[Anonymous No.12090290]

>>12083384
Sorry pal but not only is Dawkins lumped in with those people, he is the dumbest of the lump.

[Anonymous No.12091025]

>>12087383
A child is born from preventable causes every second.

[Anonymous No.12091128]

My philosophy professor desu.

[Anonymous No.12091341]

>>12090255
>atheist, vegan, deterministic, depressed, someone who has no thoughts of their own
All symptoms of a person lacking a soul. NPCs through and through.

[Anonymous No.12091348]

>>12087173
>>12087311
>>12087383
>b-but muh problem of evil
yikes. Humefags need to read literally any philosophy of the last two centuries.

[Anonymous No.12091375]

>>12087173
Don't be absurd, evil is evidence for the existence of God.

[Anonymous No.12091482]

>>12091348

If you've researched the problem of unnecessary suffering then you would realize this isn't something resolved in philosophy. Either you're trolling me or you're doing a horrible job at convincing me that these ideas are wrong, The problem of suffering is a huge issue for those that claim an all loving god. If you have some convincing arguments against the problem of suffering then I would love to discuss them with you.

>>12090214
Yeah, I'll do my best to address those questions.

An example of unnecessary suffering is someone who suffers until they die. This happens all the time in terminal patients, people serving in war or those who are unlucky enough to die from exposure to the elements. To make matters even worse sometimes the suffering those people go through isn't something other humans get to grow from, essentially leaving them with suffering as the only or dominant qualia. I believe there to be types of suffering so severe that a person would never even have the thought that it could be worse or better and instead, their mental space is entirely filled with moment by moment anguish, torment and pain. If suffering in this way until you die isn't objectively bad then I'm not really sure what bad could mean.


Here's how Sam explains his own basis for morality.
https://youtu.be/Mm2Jrr0tRXk?t=993

[Anonymous No.12091487]

>>12091375
I think you are joking.

[Anonymous No.12091559]

>>12083211
I imagine a person who thinks of spilling a drink when I say "accidents."

[Anonymous No.12091588]

>>12086052
> words words words words words
> communist retard
it checks out

[Anonymous No.12091730]

>>12083211
A Mexican alcoholic pot smoker that does guitar setups but doesn't actually know how to play, wears plugs and hoodies daily and listens to Guthrie Govan.

[Anonymous No.12091783]

>>12091482
This is the fault I have with Harris in his reductional materialist mindset to morality; he completely ignores the meta-physical aspects of morality and is only limited to the material forms of suffering. On top of the fact that there is no quanta of suffering for him to build his case off of, no foundation on which to empirically expand his claims. The problem is that Harris's analysis on suffering is flawed since suffering occupies a space in the physical and meta-physical; you can literally feel it or you can undergo suffering from abstraction.

Hence, even in a utopic scenario of no suffering, if a mind can imagine or remember suffering (such as recalling history), it's a form of suffering. More to the point, fear is not physical real but would universally be considering a common shared experience of suffering.

[Anonymous No.12092121]

>>12091783
I don't understand why you think there are no quanta of suffering for him to build his case off of? Could you elaborate a bit more?

If we ignore the metaphysical isn't experiencing physical suffering a bad thing regardless?

>Hence, even in a utopic scenario of no suffering, if a mind can imagine or remember suffering (such as recalling history), it's a form of suffering. More to the point, fear is not physical real but would universally be considering a common shared experience of suffering.

I don't understand this point either! Sorry to make you elaborate.

[Anonymous No.12092150]

>>12092121
>If we ignore the metaphysical isn't experiencing physical suffering a bad thing regardless?
Only if you equate moral bad with suffering. In other words, no.

[Anonymous No.12092204]

These 4 "horsemens" popularity demonstrates how shit they are. Right wing NPCs

[Anonymous No.12092214]

>>12092204
>Sam Harris
>Right Wing
He's a leftist who doesn't like Islam.

[Anonymous No.12092240]

>>12092204
>Right wing
lol

[Anonymous No.12092250]

>>12092214
>>12092240
I mean their supporters are npcs

[Anonymous No.12092276]

>>12087383
>A child dies of preventable causes every five seconds.

[Anonymous No.12092384]

>>12092250
left wing has way more generated npcs tho

[Anonymous No.12092623]

>>12091482
Yeah all you got is opinions. If you're making a big claim like 'objective bad' you need something better than 'I believe'

[Anonymous No.12092692]

>>12087151
Lol at least you're up front about arguing in bad faith ;)

[Anonymous No.12092732]

>>12087242
so basically like The Secret?

[Anonymous No.12092766]

>>12091588
>literate
>dislikes jordan peterson
seems legit

[Anonymous No.12092784]

>>12083303
>d who significantly overlaps with Peterson in terms of audience
no, I like JP, but I lost a friend over his stupid love for sam harris. And hitchens was a man to respect.

[Anonymous No.12092798]

>>12084853
>PHD in neuroscience (which he shouldn't have)
why shouldnt he have it?

[Anonymous No.12092861]

>>12087082
good evidence for your claims

[Anonymous No.12092918]

>>12092121
>I don't understand why you think there are no quanta of suffering
The smallest unit of suffering you can identify and measure from an empirical standpoint. So you could objectively identify the differences in suffering from say a paper cut and rape, by reducing them their quantized units; much like matter being reduced to atoms or subatomic particles. It sounds absurd, but materially there is no differentiation between the a paper cut and rape with regards to suffering. Absurd in the sense that we all know rape is a greater suffering than a paper cut, but we can't prove that. If you can't prove the objectivity between different types of suffering, then how do you incorporate that into a "scientific" moral framework. That's why I believe Harris's moral framework is fundamentally wrong as he's applying empiricism to morality with faulty data, and passing it off as scientific truth.

To elaborate on my example, I wanted to convey the importance of meta-physics in regards to morality and suffering. You can't just eschew meta-physics all together (as Harris does) and still have a holistic expectation of suffering as purely some physical phenomenon. Tying this with my explanation above, how do you quantify something like fear scientifically? Again, you'll never be able to objectively measure as you would a particle, but we *know* it exists and at variable levels.

[Anonymous No.12092975]

>>12092918
Just to add, pic related is our current best method of 'quantifying' suffering.

So a squeamish person could sincerely self report a 10/10 suffering from a paper cut or seeing Trump give a speech and a stoic person could respond with a 1 from a gunshot or losing a losing a loved one.

[Anonymous No.12093006]

>>12083211
Guy who was a teenager or young adult during the New Atheism phase

[Anonymous No.12093675]

>>12086052
that's a "yikes" from me.

[Anonymous No.12094388]

>>12092150
Well, you're gonna have to specify what you think the metaphysical is.

>>12092150
I don't mean this as a dig, but I find it funny that you call these people NPC's because you disagree with them and can't control what they think.

>>12092276
Yes, I wish I could do more right now than be on the computer talking to all of you. However, there is some importance in spreading the good word.

>>12092623
I gave you more than "I believe." Really it is "we believe and feel." The "we" being all beings with a consciousness that experience negative qualia. The worst suffering for everyone is objectively bad.

>>12092918
The fact that we currently don't have the tools to measure suffering accurately doesn't preclude the possibility that we can measure and make intelligible how much a person is suffering. We all do it accurately on a daily basis.

Of course how much a person suffers is contextual, so we must understand it on a case by case basis.

>You can't just eschew meta-physics all together (as Harris does) and still have a holistic expectation of suffering as purely some physical phenomenon.

Why not?

>how do you quantify something like fear scientifically

I guarantee you that if we sat together watching people watch a scary movie we could very easily agree, with great accuracy, how scared someone is on some crude scale like:
1. Not scared
2. A little scared
3. Scared
4. Very scared
5. Survival mechanisms engaged

Sure we aren't as accurate with this as we are in other things, but it also is the case that we used to be largely inaccurate about those things which we are so accurate now! Everything we say and understand and describe is reductionistic, so we can always say more. We can always be more accurate. The same goes for emotions and qualia and suffering.

Another thing to think about is that emotional states and suffering absolutely must correspond with the physical world, lest our emotions become absolute nonsense generated from nothing or total randomness. Clearly, emotions are generated from randomness and are actually based off some representational content in the world. It's been consistent my whole life that every time I drink boiling hot tea my tongue gets burnt and makes me feel bad. This idea is ripped directly off of Wittgenstein's beetle in a box using emotion instead of language.

[Anonymous No.12094468]

>>12094388
>Really it is "we believe and feel." The "we" being all beings with a consciousness that experience negative qualia. The worst suffering for everyone is objectively bad.
So more opinions, not objectivity. You don't show what this 'worst suffering' is or even that is exists, or that it would be bad, or that it would be bad for everyone. You have to do a lot better.

[Anonymous No.12094618]

>>12094388
>>You can't just eschew meta-physics all together (as Harris does) and still have a holistic expectation of suffering as purely some physical phenomenon.
>Why not?
Because you can suffer outside of the physical world. I'm sure you've experienced nightmares before; they're nothing physical about that suffering. You could still exist if you were in a coma you're whole life.

The irony is that you and people like Harris already practice meta-physical thinking but are too disingenuous to acknowledge it. You believe in things without objective proof, just blind philia for sensory empiricism. You don't realize that you are not entirely a physical thing; you make mistakes, you have errors in perception, you are inherently flawed in objective judgement. If I showed you a video of a bunch of people being genocided and brutally tortured and asked you if they were suffering, you'd believe wholehearted yes. But if I then showed you another video that those same people were just actors in a Hollywood movie, what happened to the suffering? One minute it was legitimate, the next it vanished.

My point is that we're not just perfect physical autonomous where our cells equal the sum of its parts. Nor are we disembodied minds floating in the aether. We're an amalgamation of the two, both physical and meta-physical, where the sum is greater than its reduced parts.

If materialists could produce a device that measure the weight of the mind, I'd be very impressed.

[Anonymous No.12094718]

>>12083211
Why are people calling an atheist Jew based? OH THAT'S RIGHT. /LIT/ IS A GODLESS JEWISH CIRCLE JERK. HAHAHAHA.

[Anonymous No.12095680]

>>12087082
>Sargon of Akkad the persian emperor

oh boy

[Anonymous No.12095722]

>>12086052
Jesus Christ that image

[Anonymous No.12095885]

>>12091482
>The problem of suffering is a huge issue for those that claim an all loving god
If you ignore everything that's ever been written on the subject, you might very well think that.

[Anonymous No.12096159]

>>12083318
You're just trying to get people to project their dad existence.

[Anonymous No.12096224]

>>12083211

Myself

[Anonymous No.12096377]

>>12089111
Read some Frankl

[Anonymous No.12096413]

>>12094388
Typical Harris fan.
>You don't need to prove your claims when the effects are so obvious.

[Anonymous No.12096433]

high IQ, probably doesn't waste time posting on 4chan

[Anonymous No.12096670]

>>12094388
>Emotions based off some representational content in the world.
This only explains the function of emotions, not how they exist or what they actually are.
If emotions are just an evaluation of your interaction with the physical world. Then that would require you be aware of consequences and outcomes, before you could feel emotions. However we know that its impossible to think without emotions.
Basic instinctual emotions are obviously located at a deeper level than the awareness and understanding which are built on top of them. For example, you have many emotional responses which are atavistic, and built into you at the level of instinct.
Natural selection apparently formed organism's complex instincts and emotions from self replicating molecules. So how is it possible that inanimate material is made animate?