/lit/ - Literature

There isn't. You can never know anything, not even your own existence, because it is always possible to be incorrect. It is possible through some weird metaphysical dickery that nothing exists and somehow you are simultaneously incorrect about believing you exist while not even existing.

>Ask how do we know who is right?

In other words, "what are the rules to this game so I can pass the test and say the right things and convince myself that I'm learning something?"

>>5166842
agreed
if your so smart op, why don't you know who's right?

>>5166824
Don't know anything about Schitz whatever.

But question.

He didn't honestly believe that REALITY is not real, right? Just that our perception fo reality is not real? Because even if we're all in teh matrix, then the matrix is reality and reality is real, and even if an imp is tricking us all, then reality is real, and even if this is a dream, then reality is real, etc.

Any experience at all should mean that reality/existence is a thing, right?

>>5166963
Prove *to yourself* that you're having an experience right now. You cannot because there is always room for doubt.

Regards,
Taoism

>>5166824
I don't see anything wrong with that. Do you OP?

>>5166976
I don't understand. Something is occuring right now. This speech is occuring, our conversation is occuring, some kind of fundamental existence is.

Even if it is all some kind of ephemeral dream, SOMETHING happened, which means this isn't all a void of nothingingness.

>>5166982
Let me explain further. I would alter Descartes classical theory of I think therefore I am to: I think, therefore SOMETHING is. N'important quoi.

If you weren't a pleb you would know neither was right but they both paved the way for Hymenstein.

Not that hard OP, trust nothing. It's just fucking with your head now but you'll get used to it.

>>5166824
i remember my first philosophy class too op
now im unemployed but it think that it was worth it

>>5166990
>>5166982
I would alter Descartes to say, "I think... or do I? How do I know what the fuck is going on? What is subjective experience even?"

The point is, you are essentially purporting

Something is being experienced
Something must exist to be experienced
Therefore experience exists

The problem is that subjective experience is just that, subjective, to the point where logic may not even apply to it anymore because metaphysical possibility. So you don't even know if anything exists ever since you can't even define subjective experience.

Think of it this way

I believe something exists
It is possible for something I believe to be false
Therefore, it is possible that I don't exist

>>5167031
The experience in and of itself exists. Therefore something exists, namely, the experience.

>>5167031
>>5166990
There are thoughts. All that can be said.
>>5167074 yeah

>>5167018
>No capitals
>Smashing the keyboard like a monkey and being unable to express your ideas or "jokes" in a paragraph
>"They don't it be like it is, but it think"
It was your first, and the last one too

>>5166824

>implying Schlegel didn't signal the closure of epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, and air hockey once for all in his brilliant dialectical synthesis of the idealist systems of Hegel, Nagel, Fagle, Ladle, Vogel, Mabel, Table, Seagal and Bagel

>>5167114
>>5167074

Again,

You believe things exist
It is possible for your beliefs to be incorrect
Therefore it is possible that your belief that thoughts exist is incorrect

>>5167372

>he thinks beliefs are real

>laughing quineans

I think therefore I am?

>>5167366
You are aware that there is a legit thinker named Schlegel?

>>5167366

>>5167372
>It is possible for your beliefs to be incorrect
yeah that's true in the case that they're not, but in this case they are... so

>>5167479
It's impossible to prove that they are not incorrect. You would have to know ever piece of data in the natural system to ensure that you weren't under an illusion, and of course that's impossible because you can't even know if you know every piece of data in the natural system.

Any argument that posits reality is not real is tantamount to solipsism and is the result of semantic holes being dug in and around the word 'reality'

>>5167529
Sure, but metaphysics and arguably philosophy in general that isn't logic is basically pedantic horseshit now anyway. To discuss philosophy and literature is to be a smarmy waste of time in 99% of cases, I know because I've used the scientific method to determine the smarmocity of humanities faggots.

>>5167550
That depends on how shit the 'philosopher' positing whatever the fuck is, in fact that is the entire problem with philosophy. Two thousand fucking years of formal philosophy and people still want to 'posit' shit. How about you just say what the fuck IS rather than use ever-bigger words (being-in-the-world? GO FUCK YOURSELF) to try and build frameworks for even bigger words

The worst part of all of this is that I'm a god damn philosopher and the thought of ever going into an institution to practice it makes me want to kill myself

fuck everything

Why is it so difficult for STEM majors to understand that empiricism is a part of philosophy? There is simply no "science versus philosophy" argument; science comes from philosophy.

>>5167572
It's not difficult, /lit/ is just full of retards who claim to be whatever they think is cool at the time. You're taking the internet too seriously, friend.

>>5167572
But science also transcends philosophy. Philosophy doesn't lead to any fundamental truths about reality.

>>5167586
neither does science

>>5167586
>Philosophy doesn't lead to any fundamental truths about reality

yeah when I read the dao de jing i didnt come to any conclusion either

>>5167366
You funny. I kill you last.

Before you make a statement like "reality is not real", you better damn well give a precise definition for "real"

>>5167366

Something exists if it's described by physical laws.

Very simple.

>>5167474
Mike Adriano?

>>5167920
nah

How can no reality exist?
I don't understand how that's possible

>>5167366

>>5167983
yah

>>5166840
>Somehow you think exist but actually don't

This is the one thing I contend. Solipsism is the end point, and I can't think of any way you could lose the singular assumption it holds.

>>5166977
You are blind.

>>5167001
Should I trust your word on that?

>>5168069
do you really have a choice

>>5166824
>philosophy class
First mistake.

>mfw reality doesn't exist except for the moment of being in my immediate sensory vicinity

mind=blown

if my mind is the only thing that exists, what exactly is limiting it to performing within the confines of the laws of physics?

>>5167572
⇒empiricism

Science's practice of observation and experiment has nothing to do with the philosophical ideology of empiricism.

>>5168203
>mfw we live in the matrix and your senses are meaningless

>>5168878
All self-proclaimed "scientists", especially those angsty fedora tipping STEM undergrads, are unwittingly empiricists.

Arrow you're an idiot and should stop making posts that show you up as really ugly.

>>5169022
I mean I read your posts and all that goes through my head is "man, this chick is ugly." Stop being so fucking mad all the time.

>>5168986
>tfw you're just a brain in a vat

The chicks of /lit/:
Feminister: "The world is mine."
Arrow: "ARGH I'M FUCKING UGLY, LET THE WORLD BURN!"
Butterfly: [see above, if either of those two are attracting considerable attention]

>>5169057
/lit/ only has two grills?

>>5169104
Today anon learns how to count to 3.

>>5169042

>implying "you" exist

>>5169160
>implying

>>5166842
This is one of the reasons why i dont want to go into the accademica of Philosophy

>>5166990
>still debating existence and knowledge
>post 20th century
sieg heil

>>5166840
>"I know you can never know anything, not even your own existence, because it is always possible to be incorrect. Except for me, of course!"

>>5169040
>ad hominem

>>5168211
Can someone answer this?

>>5172234
Itself does. The mind is more than only the conscious mind. In solipsism the subconscious mind creates the world and the laws of physics.

>>5172255
yeah so what I'm saying is that if the mind realises that it is the only thing that exists, why can't it just transcend these laws, even if they're self-imposed

>>5172271
Do you want the blue pill or the red pill, Neo?

>>5172281
redpill me

matrix did come to mind
I suppose I'm asking why can't shit go down like in the matrix. why can't i, upon realising that only my mind is real, start flying and master kung fu etc

>>5172294

Why does your mind have to be able to do something simply because it is the only "thing" existing?

1. Free to Choose by Milton Friedman

2. Freedom Manifesto by Steve Forbes

3. Flat Tax Revolution by Steve Forbes

4. How Capitalism Will Save Us by Steve Forbes

>>5172320
if it is the only thing in existence, surely it is in control of everything, especially of those things that are a manifestation of it, such as the perceived reality around me

hence should it not be possible to transcend these self-imposed boundaries?

>>5172373

I don't' understand where does the assumed capability of dominating the reality that spawns from your brain come from. Why does the fact that it is a projection of your brain mean that reality should be subject to it?

humans are burdened with some sort of addiction to information and perception. because of this, humans end up filling in the blanks, usually lazily. if there is something that one does not know, they may make a full conclusion on it - they will simply find any knowledge or experience that can support a theory that seems possible.
this is why solipsism exists, one can't prove existence outside of one's consciousness, so a conclusion is made.
YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TAKE A STANCE ON ANY PHILOSOPHICAL IDEA. you can transcend opinions - you don't have to believe in anything. you don't have to choose between free-will and determinism, you can just move on.

>>5172394
I'm not stating it, I'm just inquiring about the possibility of it.

If my brain creates this reality, why can't it manipulate it?

>>5172406
your brain is used to perceive reality, and you can't control reality. the brain is simply an organ.

>>5172416
what if the brain, like all the other organs, doesn't exist

>>5172484
bumping for a reply to this

>>5173048
Jesus fucking christ what is actually wrong with you? People on /x/ aren't even this fucking pointless and retarded.

>>5166840
cogito ergo sum bitch

>>5173056
Like you never heard of the Body Without Organs.

>>5166963
Want in on the secret? Those aren't real philosophers. OP just made them up because he felt like shitposting.

>>5173102
>"The body without the body"
>Like you can't disprove I'm a 6th dimensional werewolf
>>>/x/
And kill yourself.

>>5173120
>mfw realizing the philosophy faggots are such cancerous idiots that they will argue in favor of a non-existent entity from a shitpost

Oh my god. Can we please exile these 15 year olds and the retarded christians to their own terrible board?

>>5173056
why are you so angry
from the point of solipsism, my organs don't exist

>I believe I exist
>Beliefs I hold may be incorrect
>The belief "I exist" has not been proven to be incorrect, and the holding of that belief has given a base upon which to build my entire existence mentally (within thought separate from my body)
>The use of my mental functions helps me perform tasks with my body that otherwise could not be achieved through physical task alone (Answering basic math questions, etc)
>I should remove the belief "I exist" because it may be faulty
>Even if the belief is removed, "I" could be defined as whatever the belief was removed from, therefore reinforcing the belief "I exist"

I think the problem is the premise that beliefs I hold may be incorrect, because while I exist consists of 2 co definable terms, incorrect is an extremely ambiguous term that could stretch over any number of reasons. It's like pointing a rocket at a small diamond, but ultimately the diamond would still stand because the premise "beliefs I hold may be incorrect" relies upon the premise of "I exist" because that "I" is being shown capable of beliefs.

>>5166824
>>Go to philosophy class

found your problem

>>5173120
What a pity. I was just about to order Schitzgenbauer's book.

>>5166824
sorry op, philosophy is a failed science like astrology

>>5174963
idiot spotted

>>5173048
>>5172484
listen up brother. the ONLY thing you can prove to exist is your own
thought. your questioning of your own existence proves the existence
of your thought. although, you can't prove anything else. it is
possible that the universe outside of your thought doesn't exist, but
there is no way to prove or disprove this.

take the leap of faith brother, the universe exists (if you want it to)

>>5168211
Nothing. Placebo effect, lucid dreaming, delusion, and a myriad of other phenomena lend some evidence against this.

>>5173782
i never thought the day would come where i 100% agreed with a diagram about quality, on 4chan