/lit/ - Literature

>>11752294
You were fine up till the free will part. Neither randomness nor determinism allow for free will.

Also, building artificial consciousness has all kinds of amazing implications... Manipulating/augmenting our own consciousness, linking consciousness, new epochs of human evolution, creation of a new advanced species, durable spacefaring consciousness / effective immortality (if it can be produced with limited or no biology).

>>11750696
A: AI isn't a fad and already has many applications. If you're talking about artificial consciousness: We're not even close but it's something grand to aspire to... You have to be pretty cynical or god-fearing not to think so.

B: Even le epic philosophers xD> throw shade on cogito ergo sum, as 'think' and 'I' are presupposed. If you can't even define what a mind is, you shouldn't be so quick to assume it can't be artificed.

I think it's only the ignorant masses who are conflating AI with consciousness (although they are certainly egged-on by sensationalists.

>>11741973
>>anything that cannot be experimentally verified is not worth discussing

Experimentally prove this statement.

> And so I say unto you, yes sayers affirming life, you who are brave, crude, refined, palpable! One must calculate - for it is a calculation - the member girth to prostate orgasm ratio in order to found the Gay Science!

>It's like... society, man: the philosophy.

Decadence and nihilism are problems, not solutions, products of the industrial revolution. N advocates perspectivism, but rejects a Christian perspective outright. His slave morality is a definition born out of misunderstanding, and is prejudiced by his own irrational anti-religious bias; I can't blame him for that, Protestant institutions of his day were a source of great miseducation. Still, being ignorant of theology, anthropology, and the psychological demand for the mystical, Nietzsche declares God is dead.

Why is this proto-fedora still taken seriously?

>>11350911
>>11350982

>When a woman has scholarly inclination there is generally something wrong with her sexual nature?

so was he right?

>"Do I still have to add that in the entire New Testament there is only one solitary figure one is obliged to respect? Pilate, the Roman governor. To take a Jewish affair seriously - he cannot persuade himself to do that. One Jew more or less - what does it matter ?... The noble scorn of a Roman before whom an impudent misuse of the word 'truth' was carried on has enriched the New Testament with the only expression which possesses value - which is its criticism, its annihilation even: 'What is truth?..."

>>9142046
>liberals wouldn't really fit because they first declare themselves to be good, and everything that does not align with them to be evil (Fascists/Whites/Rich/etc). Practically speaking, this is master morality.

>/pol/tards, for example, declare Jews/Globalists/Muslims to be evil, and therefore themselves to be good by comparison. This is slave morality, defining themselves in opposition to something first and foremost, rather than asserting something first and foremost.

Please don't post anymore.