/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14978154]

>Going out with you? OK, but only if you can refute physicalism in 10 seconds.

What do you say?

[Anonymous No.14978172]

>>14978154
Panpsychism

[Anonymous No.14978187]

>>14978154
>well of course, how does it feel to eat a bat m'lady?

[Anonymous No.14978190]

>>14978172
Literal esoteric bullshit.

[Anonymous No.14978193]

>>14978154
have you heard of Plato?

[Anonymous No.14978195]

>>14978187
That beard is honestly impressive. And the backlighting really nails it

[Anonymous No.14978202]

>>14978154
>transcendental arguments her and converts her to orthodox Christianity

[Anonymous No.14978216]

>>14978154
Alvin Plantinga, in his Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism, shows that if mental properties,
such as the propositional content of beliefs, are causally inefficacious, then evolution has not been
selecting cognitive faculties that are reliable, in the sense of being conducive to true beliefs. If the
content of our beliefs does not affect our behavior, the content of our belief is irrelevant from an
evolutionary standpoint, and so the content-producing part of our cognitive faculties are irrelevant
from an evolutionary standpoint. The “reliability” – truth-conduciveness – of our cognitive faculties
can therefore not be explained by evolution, and therefore not located within the physicalist
worldview. The only way in which the reliability of our cognitive faculties can be located is if
propositional content is relevant for behavior.
If we however eliminate or deny the reliability of our cognitive faculties, then we have abandoned any
chance of making a rational case for our position, as that would presuppose the reliability that we are
denying.
But if propositional content is causally efficacious, then that either – if we are non-reductive
physicalists and mental properties are taken to be irreducible to physical properties – implies that the
causal closure of the physical domain is false or - if we are reductive physicalists and not
eliminativists regarding mental properties - it shows that matter qua matter can govern itself by
rational argumentation, in which we have a pan-/localpsychistic view of matter. Either way, we have
essentially abandoned physicalism in the process of locating the reliability of our cognitive faculties
within a physicalist worldview. We have also affirmed the theological anthropology of Christianity, in
so far as the capacity for knowledge and rational action is concerned.

[Anonymous No.14978237]

>>14978154
I fucking love chink women. I hope corona wipes everyone else out so that the only women left are east asian goddesses

[Anonymous No.14978240]

Any argument I could muster against physicalism would be refuted by your very existence. So perhaps I should start by saying you're a dream.

[Anonymous No.14978243]

>>14978154
I don't know what physicalism is. Open wide, whore.

[Anonymous No.14978549]

>>14978154
There's no physical if there's no metaphysical, like how there's no cold without hot, wet without dry, soft without hard, my dick without your vagina.

[Anonymous No.14979214]

>>14978154

You're a woman, so you're given to emotional, illogical ideas. We're concatenations of atoms in spacetime.

[Anonymous No.14979467]

>>14978240
hehhh

[Anonymous No.14979492]

>>14978216
How can you possibly say all of this in a comprehensible way in 10 seconds?

[Anonymous No.14979509]

>>14978154
I have a soul :3 now kiss me please

[Anonymous No.14979530]

>>14978154
>You have a grad degree and work as a part time bartender. Let that sink in

[Anonymous No.14979639]

>>14978154
Explain that The Cave is actually an analogy for the human mind and that anything you experience is just a shadow on the wall. Now gib sideways bagina.

[Anonymous No.14979840]

Mind states are not identical to brain states because they have properties lacking in brain states.

[Anonymous No.14980072]

>>14978154
Destroying one's brain merely releases oneself from physical constraints.

[Anonymous No.14980281]

>>14978154
the material is ideal; the outside becomes inside through time.

[Anonymous No.14980311]

>>14979840
such as?

[Anonymous No.14980324]

>>14980072
Based Bernardo Kastrup

[Anonymous No.14980330]

>>14978154
Throw the First Critique at her

[Anonymous No.14980509]

>>14978154
I have discovered and understood that consciousness/awareness is without parts and thus non-dual. For one cannot split his awareness into the hating and the loving, into the perceiving and the not perceiving, into the seeing and the blind, into the ignorant and the enlightened. It is all non-dually without parts and thus immaterial. I have finally refuted materialist doctrine with the help of contemplating upon Guénon. I have escaped the spiritual desert...

[Anonymous No.14980534]

>>14980509
Based! Physical pleasure are for those who have deluded by the Maya...

[Anonymous No.14980538]

>>14980509
also forgot my pbuh

[Anonymous No.14980769]

>>14978216
The evolutionary processes that created the modern human mind didn't specifically select for the most ideal structures in the forming of a logical mind; natural selection towards then partially sapient humans' minds was geared towards creating the thoughts which would result in the early human species achieving a higher fitness for the populations' environments. If a mental structure which caused belief that aggressive animals, poisonous plants, and dangerous environments were attached to dark spirits/forces improved fitness in very early humans 150,000 years ago, then the evolutionary development of said structure made sense at that point for the human species's persistence and growth.
The structures which created these beliefs were formed over a period of at least 5,000 generations (generation = 30 years) while they started being increasingly detrimental to human societies within 100 generations of the present, so the time possible for natural selection in humans against a mind which produces illogical thoughts is around 1/50th of the time it took for the human mind to evolve into its current form. Due to human artificial selection almost universally favoring humans of priest castes whom individually benefit from these structures, natural selection against a mind that promotes and creates now-outmoded religious beliefs which lower the fitness of human populations would be far outweighed by human marriage choices regardless.

[Anonymous No.14980840]

>>14978216
The evolutionary processes that created the modern human mind didn't specifically select for the most ideal structures in the forming of a logical mind; natural selection of then partially sapient humans' minds was geared towards creating the thoughts which would result in the early human species achieving a higher fitness for the populations' environments. If a mental structure which caused belief that aggressive animals, poisonous plants, and dangerous environments were attached to dark spirits/forces improved fitness in very early humans 150,000 years ago, then the evolutionary development of said structure made sense at that point for the human species's persistence and growth.
The structures which created these beliefs were formed over a period of at least 5,000 generations (generation = 30 years) while they started being increasingly detrimental to human societies within 100 generations of the present, so the time possible for natural selection against a mind which produces illogical thoughts is around 1/50th of the time it took for the human mind to evolve into its current form. Due to human artificial selection almost universally favoring humans of priest castes and/or devout believers whom individually benefit from these structures maintaining, natural selection against a mind that promotes and creates now-outmoded religious beliefs which lower the fitness of human populations would be far outweighed by human marriage choices regardless.

[Anonymous No.14981051]

I cant, but neither can you.
Then i punch her in the face

[Anonymous No.14982060]

>>14978154
I run up and knock her the fuck out with a single strike

[Anonymous No.14982081]

>>14978154
If everything we could ever consider to be true or false is nothing but what we measure as electric impulses within the brain, then the collective measuring experience of that brain itself (i.e. everyone knows brains are pink) is also nothing more than an electric impulse within these brains. Thus, since then ALL THINGS that I and you and our ancestors have witnessed are mere bzzzzz's along some vroomvroom highways, we may rightly conclude that it is then wholly irrelevant since it is infinitely recursive. That is to say, it don't matter because I can get fully drunk without drinking a drop of alcohol if I will it so.

[Anonymous No.14982344]

>>14978154
Honey, let's be real. If you really cared you'd be dating one of those scrawny nerds you go to class with.