/lit/ - Literature

>>12004599

>/lit/ is sentient
>capital is sentient

>>10907974

Damn. I am confused, what have I done

>>10819630

I am thoroughly disappointed

>>10714979

>Intersectionalists HATE HIM!
>Enlightenment philosopher has found a way out of the gender disparity conundrum
>CLICK NOW to learn the truth

Also do you think he enjoyed being whipped by a dominatrix?

>>10580866

I dated a tomboy once, and yes she was a confused bisexual who would find out she's actually lesbian and choose a girl over me.

I hope this is not a general feature, but she was extremely vapid. You know these people fully drained of life, the kind that occupies their whole day with anxiety over a simple activity such as doing groceries or going to a class or a certain exam? She would do one relevant thing per day and then spend the rest on the same repetitive anxiety-related tasks such as eating-toast ritual or vacuuming-room ritual. She was also one of these very passive people who engaged in a cult of "lightness" and pleasant/smooth things such as listening to the Beatles, walking under rains, Ghibli movies and classical-ish French stuff.

She of course was very sensitive which is cute for the first months but then you realize she is utterly incapable of holding ground in a discussion, forcing you to either measure yourself and carefully thread the line of not-offending-her, or break her porcelain heart and risk losing all your progress towards any kind of reciprocity. Said reciprocity never came of course, not because she didn't want to but because whatever feelings she could express were only representations of actual feelings, embellished by her naive and largely neutral views of the world.

With all that said, she would get really built up from all the repressed feelings and from all the lightness of being constantly surrounding her, and contrast that to a pretty formidable (but infrequent) sexual appetite. If you ask me, I'd say it's not worth the effort at all, not even for herself, because most of it is wasted away in realizing sex is not something easily embellished and nothing like the softcore stuff she enjoyed watching from time to time. Can't blame her for simply staying with another girl at all.

So in my own little anecdotal experience I'd personally have a lot of trouble writing a tomboy, because it would come out as really bad French cinema. Alas, it would have been an accurate description of reality.

>>10575439

>Everyone is from the US on this site

>>10543434

Wasn't his post 4/ precisely the thing Hume has done away with? He is basically trying induction on the hard problem of conscience in a single sentence using something as frail as "if we knew all of physics we would know conscience" as his evidence. This is so asinine to read as a physicist, because emergent properties of complex systems such as conscience are simply not that much treatable by our most developed logical systems.

In short, we can't actually claim consciousness lies inside the domain of physics until we expand on the mathematical basis to (analytically, not through statistics and importance sampling like we do today) include emergence. All we can do so far is automagically derive properties from sampling over millions and millions of "trial cases", with no way to say if we are actually poking at something meaningful or simply exhausting phase space to get what we want.

Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like he's just pulling a soft Leibniz-ish argument instead of actually making any claims about utilitarianism in itself. i.e to me he's saying something more like "lul conscience is natural phenomena guys there is an equation guise lets solve it pls". Conscience might (we have no way of knowing right now) be purely material, as it seems very much to be, but still fundamentally unsolvable, therefore forcing us to resort to the kind of things Hume loves and hard utilitarians abhor.