namero999

8 ms·

61.
by namero999 4y ago
Nice to see him mentioned. He's very little known, yet one who can argue properly and one of the few that make much sense.
62.
by namero999 4y ago
Can you argument your desire for a quantifiable evidence without begging the question? There is research compatible with these claims. It's mentioned and linked in the link I've previously provided.
63.
by namero999 4y ago
The composition problem is considered the hard problem of panpsychism. But as your intuition correctly points out, it is definitely easier than the original hard problem of materialism, which is a category jump from quantities to qualities.
64.
by namero999 4y ago
Something that assumes its conclusion and doesn't explain anything is not even wrong... At any rate, given the context of the thread I didn't feel the need to clarify what the composition problem nor idealism are. But since you as
65.
by namero999 4y ago
Panpsychism is untenable because it trades the hard problem of consciousness for the composition problem. The only consistent and coherent game in town is analytical idealism.
66.
by namero999 4y ago
Of course not. And sorry if I've missed the sarcasm :)
67.
by namero999 4y ago
Recalling a memory or thinking about the future or whatever, are still and always experiences in the now. You are not getting out of it.
68.
by namero999 4y ago
One must explain how the jump from quantities to qualities works.
69.
by namero999 4y ago
It's the ultimate riddle.
70.
by namero999 4y ago
Precisely. That's why the placebo effect is so effective.
71.
by namero999 4y ago
I can see how citing Dunning-Kruger makes one feel competent and smart but we can stop doing so since its findings are a textbook example of the reproducibility crisis.
72.
by namero999 4y ago
Why is a terrible question when dealing with the reduction basis :)
73.
by namero999 4y ago
Like I briefly mention in another comment, there is a point in claiming that what mind does is precisely to constantly deceive itself, yes. But the original comment sounds like hooking up to some factoids to bulk dismiss religious beliefs a
74.
by namero999 4y ago
Well, there's nothing I disagree with in your statement, but am also not sure how to fit it within the previous exchange. OP was implying that, because there could be cases where the description of a phenomenon contrasts with the direc
75.
by namero999 4y ago
Sounds like a false equivalence. The contradiction here is between our physical rendition of a phenomenon (like the image being rendered upside-down on the retina due to optics) and experience. We don't have a physical description of b
76.
by namero999 4y ago
I take it all the way _down_ to the reduction basis, which is the only place where all of this matters. When a biologist says that a bacterium exists, they are making a descriptive statement, not an ontological one. To say that a bacterium
77.
by namero999 4y ago
I have read that book, but I personally disagree with such a premise. I hold that in the moment a scientist or otherwise poses a statement in the form of "X exists in and of itself", they are doing philosophy, not science. The sci
78.
by namero999 4y ago
A tiny adjustment to an otherwise ok summary: physics state how nature behaves, and not what structures exist in and of themselves. All structures posed by physics are metaphorical proxies stemming from our perception, not real structures.
79.
by namero999 4y ago
That's a very peculiar definition of rationality... But can't blame you, it's one of those words that modern language successfully tore apart, and most people nowadays equate rationality with logic, creating lots of troubles
80.
by namero999 4y ago
Citation needed kind of comment. The Void you refer to boils down to meaning. Whether you like it or not, religion is precisely meant to fill that void: religion means re-legare, to bind together in a coherent whole.
81.
by namero999 4y ago
Science can't even answer "what". I'm not sure "why" is a smart question to ask nature. Agreed on "how".
82.
by namero999 4y ago
Korg nts-1. Same audio processing of a minilogue in a raw pcb factor. you might need an external midi controller to fully unleash it's power but those are cheap, used.
83.
by namero999 4y ago
Same. My favorite topic (not easily brought up at parties though). Powerful meditation... Some suggested readings would be Ernest Becker and Sheldon Solomon.
84.
by namero999 4y ago
Why? Life is long enough when well lived. My intuition is decisively against the idea of stretching longevity. How about we try to make more meaningful the time we are given rather than having more capacity for idleness and dread?
85.
by namero999 5y ago
Unfortunately you might be right :)
86.
by namero999 5y ago
If you follow the thread all the way you'll discover that in this philosophy, whose roots are to be found in the mystical tradition of Hinduism - Advaita Vedanta, your essential conscious being is shared (I'm wary of the western u
87.
by namero999 5y ago
That's just how happiness looks like when observed across a dissociative boundary :D
88.
by namero999 5y ago
Interestingly, his core point is that your own essential being is not self-conscious.
89.
by namero999 5y ago
Can you elaborate on how you think this is relevant? Honest question. By the way, I would totally support such an initiative, but not with the goal of eventually removing all religious material, rather to avoid single perspectives.
90.
by namero999 5y ago
Cognition != consciousness (or actually, ⊂ )

More ›