/lit/ - Literature

Humans are lazy fuckers. They HATE learning, for most people it's physically and emotionally painful so they avoid it like all pain. All you can do is go slow and don't push your luck. Really think hard about the questions you ask. You have to one shot kill their ideas if possible. Often people will only let you Socratic them a few times before they shut down so make sure your shots count.

Your goal is inception. You want to plant that seed of doubt deep, DEEP, in their brains and walk away. If you do it right the Socratic Seed will grow and thrive without your tender care. This is the goal. Rinse+repeat

I wrote a sci-fi/fantasy novel which I'm going to self-publish and am now struggling to think of way of selling it to people.

I just realized that I would likely get at least some readers if I started telling people that I believe that I wrote it with telepathic assistance from the pilots of the AEP's.

It never seemed like something worth mentioning until now. Just to be clear, I do actually believe this, so I would not be lying.

I kind of don't want people thinking I'm crazy or a huckster, but I need a way of getting people to be interested in reading this book.

Thoughts?

>Premise 1: The flow of time is an illusion of being alive. Every moment in time exists simultaneously and eternally according to multiverse theory. The feeling of change is merely a result of our subjective experience within the stream of consciousness, where our perception and awareness give rise to the illusion of time passing and the progression of events.
Proof: https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/738387/Time-NOT-real-EVERYTHING-happens-same-time-einstein
>Premise 2: If we were purely physical, lacking an immaterial essence or soul, we would exist at all moments simultaneously and not experience the flow of time at a particular moment. However, we do experience a sense of the present moment or "now," suggesting that there is more to our existence than purely physical processes.
>Premise 3: Our experience of existing at a precise point in time, the present moment, suggests the existence of an immaterial aspect separate from the physical, commonly referred to as the soul. This immaterial aspect allows for our subjective experience of time and the sensation of living in the present moment.
>Premise 4: If our existence were purely physical without a soul, our experience of time would be akin to viewing a static image where all moments are present simultaneously, rather than perceiving a dynamic and ever-changing present moment.
Conclusion: Therefore, the existence of an immaterial aspect, commonly referred to as the soul, explains our subjective experience of time and the perception of the present moment.

books for schizotypal people?

If the brain gets damaged, you would not be able to think or imagine things properly. When you have a body, you are only able to imagine and think things to a certain degree.
If that is the case, is the mind truly separate from the body or is everything that we think nothing but delusions? Can we think without a brain or body?

Does Descartes make a category-mistake about mind-body dualism as per Ryle's response to him in "Descartes' Myth"? Why?

Lol how fuckin dumb was this guy I mean just look at this shit

Why are reddit "scientists" so intent on claiming that the mind is purely physical? Has no one read Nagel or Jackson?

What do I read to focus on the mind-body problem? From my search for good literature so far, most of the interesting theories have been made after 1960. Is it really necessary to "start with the Greeks"?

>>7485101
You convinced me, thanks

>>6831168
rimbaud, goethe, murray siskind, and molloy

they're going to discuss that scene in american beauty where the twerp says a plastic bag is the most beautiful thing he's ever filmed

Am I the only one who doesn't get the mind-body problem and the debate over consciousness?

It seems like such a non-issue to me. Surely what we call "the mind" or "consciousness" is just the experience of being a human being. So-called "qualia" isn't mysterious at all because we can't conceive of it being any other way - we don't find it surprising that water is wet (or if you do, you shouldn't). Then you have the materialists who say you = your brain. But surely I'm my whole body (including the brain)? I walk with my legs, not with my brain. I feel an itch on my arm, not in my brain. There's no extra "thing" called a mind or consciousness.

Check my duals!

Did Descartes ever really put forth dualism as a way of explaining the mind-body problem or was he really advocating a type of mental monism?

Also how do you feel about eliminative materialism?

Mind thread I guess