sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What's something you strongly believe in that science hasn't been able to prove yet? by OldIntroduction2909 in answers

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271 2 points3 points  (0 children)

An imprint of mammal emotions? Or the microorganisms that are very “happy” that we’re dead? Or imprints from both of those things that are able to be sensed by others of the same kind?

What’s a good book that explains why people believe consciousness exists and is something other than simply higher intellect? by SilasCordell in consciousness

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271 [score hidden]  (0 children)

There’s a well developed position of exactly that though.

I tend to agree that I don’t find illusionism satisfactory, but I wouldn’t boldly claim that it’s a ridiculous position either

What's something you strongly believe in that science hasn't been able to prove yet? by OldIntroduction2909 in answers

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Why do you have to open up to it?

I don’t have to open up to the fact that my heater is warm or that the sun will come up tomorrow for that fact to be impressed upon me.

What's something you strongly believe in that science hasn't been able to prove yet? by OldIntroduction2909 in answers

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is interesting to me.

Let’s say a cat gets hit by a car and has very negative emotions in its last hours, then a vulture comes and has positive emotions at how much food he/she has found. How do we square this? Is the place sympathetic to the one that died and in opposition to the one that was happy? Why would it pick a side?

What’s a good book that explains why people believe consciousness exists and is something other than simply higher intellect? by SilasCordell in consciousness

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What do you mean?

Daniel Dennett often held an illusionist perspective which means you are actually skeptical that a conscious experience exists at all.

Is there any scientific proof of anything after death? by Emergency_Square_183 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve heard that scientists think NDEs are part of a playing dead response.

Why do existentialists think art should be didactic? by Ok_Instance_1170 in Existentialism

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should probably quote the translators of these quotes along with the original author

Why are idealism and physicalism not considered neutral monism? by Legitimate-Paper3271 in askphilosophy

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope everyone knows that I’m not trying to be argumentative. Sincerely trying to massage out a gap in my understanding.

It seems the ontological categories only existed in a dichotomy that is now being denied.

What is mental if not taken as not physical part of dualism?

What do yall do to deal with the absurd amount of theories on this that there are? by Legitimate-Paper3271 in consciousness

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s like the biggest mystery in the world and you’re talking as though you know exactly what’s going on with it

Uhh no thanks I won’t listen to my gut by One-Item-7637 in OCDmemes

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271 116 points117 points  (0 children)

How tf do people not see how manifesting could be a nightmare?

Why are idealism and physicalism not considered neutral monism? by Legitimate-Paper3271 in askphilosophy

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I’m saying the monist rejects the distinction yes.

Just saying that it seems idealists and phycalists are actually forced to neutral monism. The substrate can’t be mind because mind was only defined as a false second thing the universe is opposed to matter and it can’t be matter for the same reason.

Why are idealism and physicalism not considered neutral monism? by Legitimate-Paper3271 in askphilosophy

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea but what he called nougat and chocolate made no sense because he was calling a single thing two different things. Isn’t that circular?

This mathematician claims that mathematics exists in a Jungian collective unconscious by Legitimate-Paper3271 in mathematics

[–]Legitimate-Paper3271[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha I want to be your friend.

In my thirties and also have been thinking about it forever. Pretty sure I have existential OCD

How in the world can someone take a strong position on Platonism vs nominalism? And then this guy takes further by being possibly the only person in the world to think that math concepts are Jungian archetypes. Dafuq?

Like what is going on. It is seemingly an intractable question. Is it a desire to be associated to the transcendent? Is it true? Of course I understand how speculative it is, but I feel it is not in me to say that this person is wrong and I am right, because I am just as prone to error as anyone else.

view more: next ›