/lit/ - Literature

>>18204201
the world exists even when youre not there. Your "personal horizon" doesnt consist of everything.

>>18204201

>>18204215
Prove it.

>>18204201
Death is not possible.

>>18204201
A world comes to an end. Not all worlds. There is no 'the world'.

>>18204215
actually, the opposite of this is true - i exist even if the world does not

>>18204314
prove that im not balls deep in your mom right now

>>18204339
Dad, get off 4chan.

>>18204201
You're right anon.

>>18204327
My perspective contains the world, but not vice versa. Either I don't exist, or the universe doesn't exist apart from me. I'm quite certain that I exist.

You get to find out what-ever happens next anon. It's like a change of clothes, or the turn of a page, in a story, we'll find out when we finish this page called life anon

>>18204201
Where can I get this book for free?

>>18204407
mediafire (period) com/file/mf4st76bxa7b5mf/

>>18204550
God bless you.

>>18204331
Not true. You’re the world and you.

>>18204407
it's on libgen

>>18204364
I didn’t realise how terrifying the eternal return is.

What does any of this have to do with LITERATURE?

>>18204201
>>18204364
>Death is not an event in life: we do not live to experience death. If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present. Our life has no end in the way in which our visual field has no limits.

>>18205027
>death is not an event in life

>>18205954

It isn't. Dying is. This exact subject came up on /sci/ a few days ago and I correctly explained it, looks like the thread was pruned.

>>18204939
It doesn't imply the eternal return, at least not as Nietzsche described it. There's no reason to think your consciousness has to be linked to the EXACT same configuration of atoms as it was during your life, when those atoms are changing all the time throughout your life. Just as from moment one to moment two you are still aware of the same self, where the configurations of atoms have changed between the moments, likewise you can still be aware of the self between life one and life two.

>>18204201
wtf did I just read

>>18206424
why do they always having to make everything so fucking complicated and full of semantics? just get to the fucking point

>>18204201
nothing ends when you die you literally just lose the aspect of thought. god you people are so up your own asses with thinking there's some big telepathic quality to your dumb fucking existence which consists in making little circles between the toilet and the laundry and feeling as if there's something more like your thoughts about personal horizons or whatever have some importance way beyond your own limits and you don't realize this quality belongs to all living things even monkeys, it's what makes them live in the first place, it's the grand illusion lmao, thinking there's any substance to your brains experience because we're literally designed to think so, all thought is designed around thinking so, or selected for, anyway.

>>18206534
>because we're literally designed to think so
not an argument

>>18206566
shut the fuck up retard

>>18206614
not an argument

>>18206641
there's nothing to argue against retard this isn't some formal topic, arguing against something that has no credibility in the first place (an eternal consciousness) merely consists in providing alternative explanations so long as those explanations confer to the evidence at hand... fucking idiot kill yourself you mentally stunted internet philosopher not even grasping the basic concepts of argument yet requiring some big substantial proof when thats not even necessary. you're like the people who require arguments for atheism but seeming not for the existence of god, when, the former is evident and the latter not. literally kill urself

>>18205027
>Our life has no end in the way in which our visual field has no limits.
Can you see what's behind your own head, or behind an object that's in front of you? Can you look up at the sky at night and see Pluto? Our visual field does have limits.

>>18204958
>what does heidegger, bataille et al have to do with LITERATURE?

>>18206682
Arguments have been presented for the first case, and you haven't provided a counter-argument. Consider yourself rebuked. Use as many insults as you want, you only sully yourself.

>>18206748
there are exactly 0 functioning arguments for the existence of a consciousness, god, heaven, angels, abstract objects, or anything 'above and beyond' the physical. the only reason you think there are is because you're an internet philosopher so you aren't clued into the academic consensus, u have no idea why the argument from contingency doesn't function anymore because you just haven't looked into it, you'd rather believe that it does still function and rely on that, and then pesker anyone who doesn't wish to respond to it because it's broken in the first place lol. if there's an argument for consciousness existing then present it bro, or atleast name it i don't care. at the very least don't assume i need a 'counterargument' for something that's by default a dubious claim, which by default needs its own argumentation first. lol retard.
you think the earth is round? provide an argument right now otherwise you're completely wrong and the earth is actually flat by default because that's definitely how it works... again just fucking kill yourself you philosophically illiterate bitch

>>18206748
also some things are knowable based on intuition alone just as, for example, we know that things fall to the ground because of gravity and not ghosts pulling them down, despite never being familiarized with the proofs for gravity's existence, we know in a general sense that physicalist explanations prevail and it's the same in this case - what's more likely to be true, consciousness as some eternal essence or consciousness as an aggregate property of the brain? this should need no argument just as gravity needs no argument but a general acquaintance with the factual nature of it versus the merely speculative nature of ghosts, which, in your way of doing things might actually exist because they have yet to be disproved or argued against lmao. your whole understanding of philosophy is flawed at a basic level and thats why youll always be a 4chan philosopher just using it to make himself feel better about not fitting in instead of understanding the world around you.