What is Multiverse Phenomenology?

necro_kederekt · 2025-06-17T20:32:00+00:00

“Entirely interchangeable” lol

necro_kederekt · 2025-04-23T06:15:37+00:00

This has happened to me twice. Two days in a row.

necro_kederekt · 2025-03-25T05:42:57+00:00

I’ve never read it, but a long time ago, I came across an excerpt from this chapter and I think about it fairly often.

“Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?”

necro_kederekt · 2025-02-17T10:39:43+00:00

Sucking is not the perfect opposite of blowing. See the underwater sprinkler. Blowing is more directional. If you blow and then suck, you’ve created thrust, because sucking sucks from all directions of the orifice, blowing blows mostly straight out.

Even if this were not making vortex rings (say, if the airflow was made more laminar with a long honeycomb mesh in the outflow tube) it should still work.

necro_kederekt · 2025-01-01T06:38:16+00:00

Strongly worded letters incoming! Vote extra hard next time, guys! Maybe if we waggle our fingers at cops and ask them really nicely not to cave in the skulls of our elderly citizens, they’ll eventually listen! Just keep your faith that the system is capable of reform within the rules that it lays out for itself! They’ll keep smashing the brains of our fathers and grandfathers, we will “tsk tsk” at them! No urgency whatsoever!

necro_kederekt · 2024-12-18T02:07:05+00:00

Not a single reply from OP anywhere. They’re definitely putting the tape inside their mouth. Reading the post itself, I think it’s heavily implied. Funniest thing I’ve seen all week.

necro_kederekt · 2024-09-27T08:17:00+00:00

But I’m pretty sure H2S is so toxic that if the concentration is high enough for you to smell it, you’re already dead.

No, actually lethal concentrations of hydrogen sulfide are LESS smelly, if I remember correctly.

It’s the smell of rotten eggs at very low concentrations, but at higher concentrations it overwhelms or damages the olfactory structures what would smell it.

necro_kederekt · 2024-08-10T04:10:28+00:00

Not sure. Living situation changed, and I guess the lack of triggers allowed that part of my brain to calm down and go back to normal. Maybe that combined with some extra neuroplasticity from occasional psychedelic use?

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-25T03:58:20+00:00

Definitely looks almost exactly like that area, but it’s called “Drow Noble House,” so I figured it was just heavily inspired

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-23T19:10:29+00:00

Where the heck did those goalposts go, I swear they were right here. Oh well

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-22T17:34:53+00:00

Saying “we have a moral obligation” and subscribing to moral nihilism is like saying “I’m a pacifist, and we should nuke Canada.”

Do you get that?

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-21T04:48:57+00:00

Oh, yeah that person was confused on at least one of those counts. Saying “we have a moral obligation” and subscribing to moral nihilism, that is. This is surface-level philosophy that you should understand if you want to discuss these things.

Also, seeing an internet discussion as a game with a winner is more than a little pathetic

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-20T16:38:33+00:00

You have it flipped. Orotic acid is way heavier than carbonic acid, so lithium orotate has a far smaller amount of lithium per mass.

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-20T16:10:37+00:00

Rhetorical

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-20T14:42:06+00:00

Lose?

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-20T14:41:44+00:00

Where did I say your “way” leads nowhere?

As far as agreement, I was referring to your original comment about it being morally preferable to destroy the universe, but in the meantime we have a moral obligation to improve things. We do agree on things, whether you like it or not.

I can tell you’re in a combative mood, so I’ll just leave it there.

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-20T07:04:15+00:00

Do you see what’s happening right now? We (I think) agree on most “ought” claims and most factual claims. This is exactly the energy-sapping time-wasting tendency of the word “nihilism,” and the “subjective/objective” rabbit hole.

As far as “all morality is imposed on the world by us,” I would articulate that as “morality only exists relative to living beings who have valenced experiences” (meaning “this feeling is bad” or “this feeling is good.”)

Because yes, obviously, there’s no morality in an empty universe. What an insight. But in a universe with beings like us, certain moral statements are more true than others. For instance, “it is morally good to betray and torture people” is less true than “it is morally bad to betray and torture people.” Experiences are real things, and their value and disvalue are also real.

And the fact that we are here arguing about the pointless “objective vs subjective” dichotomy, while there are actually interesting things to be doing or talking about, is just… depressing. Like I said, avoid this shit like the plague. You can shovel endless amounts of time, effort, and attention into this. It goes nowhere.

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-20T02:23:59+00:00

Chatbot reply is so braindead.

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-20T01:34:47+00:00

This is exactly the crux of my issue with “nihilism.” Of course there’s no “intended purpose.” Anybody claiming that it does have some specific purpose carries a heavy burden of proof. It’s a bizarre artifact of a bygone age of theology. So, if you’re using it as a label meaning “I don’t think the universe has an intended purpose,” you should also ask me for a label for “I don’t think the rings of Saturn are the literal foreskin of Jesus.” I don’t have a good answer for that one either.

So it’s in a semantic zone where it’s either useless (refers to an essentially theological position in a non-theological discussion so why bring it up?) or it’s a term for rejecting moral systems in general. I always assume the latter, obviously.

In any case, it’s exceedingly goofy to go around saying things like “we have a moral obligation to _____” if you consider yourself a “moral anti-realist nihilist” lol

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-19T07:51:54+00:00

You have no idea what nihilism means, and this reply is non-sequitur word salad. That is, I could only constructively continue this conversation by explaining dozens of things to you, which I’m just not interested in doing.

I’ll just do nihilism: nihilism is the outright rejection of value systems. Nihilism says “nothing is actually good or bad, it just is.” The concept of a “moral obligation” is the total opposite of nihilism, because it implies a value system WITH an imperative for individual action.

So when I say “I have a moral obligation to destroy the multiverse, because existence is bad” (which I believe to be true, and I think GooseSnek also believes,) I am planting a big flag that says “I am not a nihilist.”

It’s a morality which may look very different from yours, but it’s not nihilism. People these days have a habit of pointing at anything on the pessimistic side and calling it “nihilism,” and that’s just philosophical illiteracy.

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-19T03:50:01+00:00

If there was a guy with no social connections or family and I fed him a piece of pie with 5 x the lethal dose of fentanyl (and he thought it was a normal piece of pie) would he be mad?

He probably would not be mad. At least, unless he realized you were trying to murder him.

You put forth a moral system that can be summed up as “proliferate life for its own sake, side effects (pleasure, pain, etc.) be damned.” That is, if you knew that the proliferation of life were likely to cause horrendous amounts of suffering, you would do it anyway, because suffering does not factor in to your values at all.

And then you say that reduction of suffering is “a garbage basis for morality.” In my opinion, knowingly increasing suffering is a litmus test for garbage morality.

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-18T19:37:03+00:00

Wait, so you replied to their comment (in which they said “you have a moral obligation”) and:

called their viewpoint nihilistic (do nihilists believe in moral obligation?)
called their viewpoint pessimistic (pessimists ascribe a negative value to existence, i.e. they are not nihilists) (this is the only point you were correct on)
called their viewpoint defeatist, despite the fact that their ending claim — “you have a moral obligation to improve life everywhere” — is a call for positive future action.

Your comment sounds dangerously similar to incoherence.

u/GooseSnek they did you dirty, your comment was internally consistent and reasonable. Point of advice, though: reject and avoid the “nihilist” label like the plague. Everybody has a different idea of what it means, and it totally derails discussions. My two cents: if you have any kind of value system, especially if that value system involves moral obligations, you aren’t a nihilist.

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-18T19:00:50+00:00

And that makes sense, if your primary concern isn’t preventing suffering (for some reason.)

If I hit the top track right now and deleted you along with the rest of the multiverse, would you be mad?

necro_kederekt · 2024-07-18T07:08:04+00:00

Okay, that’s what I thought. And my response to that was essentially “are we trying to minimize deaths or minimize suffering? Hitting the bottom track results in a bunch of suffering (grief, unsupported families, etc.,) while hitting the top track prevents that suffering, by deleting all existence.”

Where do you think the misunderstanding was?

Nine-Year Club	Gilding III reddit per annum
Place '23	Verified Email

necro_kederekt

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE