/lit/ - Literature

ockham's razor leads to pretty much whatever you want it to

>>2542988
>post giganigga in /lit/
>be a faggot

I could say that it doesn't because assuming the external world leads to better explanatory power?

I could say it leads to solipsism because it leads to only one entity, and everything can be explained by saying - it's all in my head.

>>2542996

this was a gigganigga that was never used unfortunately.

>>2542998
this is lit, not /b/. If you're looking for a generic image post Ducreux or something. This is a high brow image board bro.

does anyone have that pic of frederick douglass' head shopped onto the naked black guy riding the giant kfc bucket. i made it like 2 years ago iirc

Also I agree but solipsism is the most wonderful belief system anyone can possess. If you're a solipsist you don't have to burden your conscience with the needs of other people, you can pursue your own agenda with impunity and not feel bad being ruthless about it. Its great, really. You feel like a god and its just an all around convenient and useful concept to apply in your day to day life. I would recommend solipsism to everyone except I'm the only one who can benefit from it.

>>2542996
Ironically enough, the girl in your picture likes her men black.

>Does Ockham's Razor lead to solipsism?

Only if you have no idea what Occam's razor or solipsism is. Seriously, the two aren't connected in any way.

>>2543003

Only if you're a selfish fuck. I live for other people and friendship.

>>2543013

How so? Occam's raxor says not to multiply entities beyond necessity. Thus if taken in one way it can easily lead to solipsism.

>>2543051
But that's bullshit.

>>2543049
You don't. You're selfish like me, you just don't realize. You don't live for "other people", you live for yourself and the people that make YOU happy.

>>2543049
How old are you? And don't bullshit me, we both know you're not >22

>>2543065

You can't really do that. You're like those Christians who say atheists REALLY believe in God, even though they say otherwise.

>>2543068
No, he's luje those atheists who understand evo.psych.

>>2543071
like*

>>2543071

Why would you want to understand a pseudo-science?

>>2543051
Solipsism is one of the most irrefutable worldviews, but not the most simple one.

>>2543003
Why not disregard morals without resorting to solipsism? It sounds a bit like coward amoralism to me. "It's all just a big dream so I can do what I want". I also wouldn't feel very much like a god because all I'm ruling is my own imagination.

A worldview in which other entities exist is much more satisfying. Solipsism turns the greatest sex into a wank and the most epic defeat of your enemies into a victorious video game session. One undermines the ability to truly pleasure or hurt or otherwise influence other beings. It undermines power dynamics and one of the if not /the/ supreme motivator of human action.

>>2543077
I fucking can't stand /lit when it comes to evolution and religion. I'm glad I wasn't born in mmuuurika

>>2543068
I can't really do what? I'm talking about logic and basic knowledge about human behavior. But you can keep believing in fairy tales if that makes you happier.

>>2543081
Evo psych isn't evolution.

>>2543083

Informal logic or symbolic logic? Can you present your logical reasoning? What basic knowledge?

>>2543079
>Solipsism is one of the most irrefutable worldviews, but not the most simple one.
What is the most simple worldview?

>>2543065

I do things for other people even when it doesn't make me happy.

Question:

Why are so many egoists obnoxious and mean-spirited?

Like I'm an egoist, but it's part of my narcissistic attitude to live up to a certain moral standard and a certain humble disposition. I do these things because I feel they are what is best for me and living up to that standard gives me pleasure. Why am I in the minority here? Why are most egoists rather dickish and amoral?

>>2543089
I said logic as "common sense". It's logic that you try to get what you want, this is basic for your survival. Directly, you do what you want (if you can), because that's what can make you happy. Like the sociable living being that you are, you also need the company of other social beings of your species, and when you make strong emotional bounds with them, they become your loved ones (implying you're not a psychopath or autistic). Making your loved ones happy increases your own happiness (because you've got strong emotional bounds), so you directly try to make them happy to, indirectly, make yourself happy. You don't love "others", you don't love my loved ones: you love YOUR loved ones, why? Because they're linked to YOU.

>>2543091
Good question, I think that depends on the person and what they find most plausible and what people can intuitively accept. I've never met a person who sincerely embraced solipsism.

>>2543092
You would probably suffer mentally if you were to go deliberately against your values.

It's like a person who's studying for an exam and whines he doesn't want to do so. When you tell him "well, stop studying then" they say they "can't" because then they would be kicked out of school. People take imaginary situations into the equation such as "not studying but still getting good grades" in this example, whereas the actual choice is studying or failing. They choose the one they dislike the least.

In the same way, the alternative for you doing things for others isn't neutral, it is actively feeling bad. You help others not to make you happy, but to inhibit yourself from feeling guilt. It's the same principle but on the other side of the scale.

In this way, people can always be said to make the choices that they think will make them feel the least miserable. This is why parents risk their lives saving their children, because they can't live with themselves if they don't do it.

>>2543094
Being a moral egoist and being a dick are not synonyms. But most of the people like to think that if you're not an altruist you must be a dick, why? People like being surrounded by mindless slaves that will make whatever they want. Dealing with another egoist is something that simple minded people cannot stand.

>>2543099

>I said logic as "common sense".

Oh, common sense. That silly thing that morons appeal to when they can't actually prove anything. Alright, cool.

>>2543094
You can't really tell, can you? You only notice the dicks, the clever egoists like yourself stay incognito.

>arguing over philosophy with some halfass pseudoknowledge you got form reading wikipedia articles
>being plebs
YOU DO THIS

>>2543104
>meta shitposting without contributing or refuting anything

Go read your fiction.

>>2543103

Ah, good point.

>>2543101
If you keep reading you may get the point. Common sense, intuitions, are the base of our knowledge. If you want to convince me about some counter-intuitive statement you better have a nice argument or your statement will be treated like bullshit. btw, nice argument calling me a moron when you can't disprove what I say.

>>2543104

Who are you quoting?

>>2543110

Why do I need to disprove your nonsense?

You really do argue like a Christian.

Intuition is really a terrible gauge of truth.

Go outside and look around. It looks mostly flat. Therefore the Earth is flat. My intuition has proven it.

>>2543092
It does. You won't give me money, and that's something that wouldn't make you happy but that would make me happier.

Altruistfags: why do you get bothered because of my egoism? If you're really altruist you should feel ok about my egoism: you act to make others happy, I act to make myself happy, so why don't we act together to make myself happy? Wouldn't that be ok for us all? Or is it that you're not so altruist and a little bit like me even if you don't want to admit it?

>>2543112
>It looks mostly flat
>there is a horizon

pick 1

>>2543112
My nonsense? lol nice argument again. You don't get what's the point in intuition. I don't care. Call me a christian or whatever I really don't give a fuck if someone that doesn't know how to argue properly doesn't agree with me.

>>2543117

Just because I can't see the whole thing doesn't mean it isn't flat. If I kept going I'd get to the end eventually.

I can't see the end of your house when I'm in your living room, but I know intuitively that it must have an end.

>>2543118

>appeals to common sense
>claims others don't know how to argue

Oh my.

>>2543120
Everybody appeals to common sense. And as I said, if you keep reading you'll get the point. It's all very simple. What do you appeal to? "you're just wrong because you are"? Yes, your rhetoric is amazing. Also, I recommend you to read some Wittgenstein, specially On certainty, consequences will never be the same.

>>2543122

I don't appeal to anything. I'm not arguing with you. I don't have to disprove every baseless claim made in my general direction. (common sense is not a base)

Solipsism is convolute. It can't possibly be the result of ockham's razor reasoning.

>>2543128
Intuition (common sense) is a base. Have you even...? And you appeal to anything to say that I'm wrong? lol Nice one.

>>2543136
You're fighting for a hopeless cause, friend. Convincing feminine minds isn't done with rational argument.

>>2543136

>Intuition (common sense) is a base.

Would you like to argue against my intuition that the Earth is flat?

>>2543149
There is evidence that it isn't. Intuition is not absolute, but is the base of any kind of knowledge, it can be proved wrong though.

Now, seriously, not knowing the importance of intuitions implies not knowing shit about actual philosophy...

>>2543136

Actually I beg to differ. Intuition isn't any base to the truth. More like something like inductive reasoning is a base. Sure there may be problems, but it works a hell of a lot better than intuitions.

I think you gave the example that you intuitively know that someone's house has an end. I say no. You come to that conclusion because you've seen houses before and you reason that this house is just like those houses.

No intuition there, just inductive reasoning.

Some people say that babies are born solipsistic, but through the same reasoning they come to realise that other people are real too.

>>2543157
Intuition is the base from which an idea springs, then you use rational thought to figure out whether or not it's right or not. This shit is exactly why STEMfags don't take you seriously.

>>2543166
Intuitions are not the base of truth, but are the base of any later hypothesis testing. My point is that, when arguing, you cannot disprove one's point because "it's just an intuition", if you want to refute an intuition you must have to bring some strong argument. Intuitions are the simplest notions we've got, and they tend to be the most useful on our lives. One must trust his own intuitions before considering any kind of doubt, this is what I meant by "the base".

>>2543173
Yes, but when I was appealing to intuition I was expecting some
>rational thought to figure out whether or not it's right or not
but what I got was "hurr durr common sense is wrong".

>>2543106
fiction? im writing my dissertation on philosophy of mathematics.

you are arguing about topics you are utterly ignorant of with strangers on the internet.

>>2543173

>This shit is exactly why STEMfags don't take you seriously.

But STEMfags don't even use rational thought. They use a practical method.

>>2543192
Then enlighten us, please. That would be more entertaining than just pointing at others' ignorance, wouldn't it?

>>2543183

what are we even arguing about though? Egoism or solipsism?

I joined this late.

>>2543203
I was talking about egoism, or moral solipsism (but not about metaphysical solipsism).

>>2543079
"Why not disregard morals without resorting to solipsism? It sounds a bit like coward amoralism to me. "It's all just a big dream so I can do what I want""

That's kind of the point. I'm saying if you have a sense of morality and you don't want to, a good way to get rid of it is to fundamentally convince yourself you're on a higher plane of existence than everyone else. This is why I said its convenient. Also I disagree that a richness of experience is necessarily lost in solipsism and in some respects it is enhanced. To say living as a solipsist would be a cold unemotional experience would be like saying writing is a cold unemotional experience. But we know when writers are writing they are often at their most passionate (particularly if they are good writers), becoming heavily emotionally invested in their character's actions and their fate.