/lit/ - Literature

right, but how does this improve our networth?

>>>/sci/

GP: Is Eris true?
M2: Everything is true.
GP: Even false things?
M2: Even false things are true.
GP: How can that be?
M2: I don't know man, I didn't do it

Illusion is real

>>919743

How will this effect the internet?

>>919816
dont you see man?

THE INTERNET IS REALITY!!!!

Our perception of reality is mechanically limited even if we were to get rid of the biological constraining factors and hook ourselves up to the most precise sensors possible.

This inevitably leads to the conclusion that all attempts at deriving a central tenet or truth from the universe is mathematically improbable since we are doing little better then guessing at the solution for an N=N(P) problem.

The human condition of attempting to do so is a critical flaw in the mental process, but one that encourages us to continue trying to better understand the universe around us and improve our lives within it. Thus it *is* a bug but it also is a feature.

Attempts to spiritually locate a nexus are just as illogical no matter where in the earth the specific concept arouse or how palatable the created ethical/moral system is. Buddhism is no more closer to the Truth then Christianity or Greek mythology, the only difference is the novelty of age, cultural differences and acceptance among their intelligentsia which allow the otherwise logical individual to wallow in spirituality long suppressed.

Existentialism is almost the exact opposite, being coldly logical and serving up an unappetizing answer completely lacking in emotional currency or reason. No one can outright deny it, but instead they put it aside for the moment in the search for a much more fulfilling answer.

poor niggers are rich white men

>>919836
this faggot

Nothing is true! Nothing is true!

The latest phase of New Age smörgåsbord and post-modern thought attempt to reconcile all thought by ignoring contradictions, retconning holy texts on the flimsiest of evidence and denying all meaning except for what the individual chooses. It is little better then children closing their eyes, plugging their ears and screaming and far more annoying.

Ultimately we are left with the penultimate thought which isn't satisfying but is all we truly have. So rev up those feelings of social discontentment and universal angst, I'm ready for some existentialism!

>>919836
>Existentialism is almost the exact opposite, being coldly logical and serving up an unappetizing answer completely lacking in emotional currency or reason. No one can outright deny it, but instead they put it aside for the moment in the search for a much more fulfilling answer.

did you know logical left brains cant see something as simple as a human face all by themselves? There are to many trajectories to take in at once. Its the right brain that takes in wholes, its the right brain that is oriented with colors and patterns and emotions, and it takes both hemispheres to use a brain to its optimal potential. You sir, by using your 'cold logic' miss half the damn picture of the world.

>>919865
idk what new age your reading, but the kind of read is fully aware of any contradictions in comparative mythology.

who said the world didnt have contradictory aspects of it anyway? Its aristotilean bullshit to say there arent any, and were past his shit. There are so many other forms of logic out there now-a-days.

>>919869
Did you know that the brain isn't a perfect logic machine and that logic is something learned even if the logic is self-evident. Computers can recognize faces and they are pure logic.

>>919883
>Did you know that the brain isn't a perfect logic machine and that logic is something learned even if the logic is self-evident.

im well aware its not a perfect 'logic' machine, ever brain has different logic, and im well aware logic is learned, thats the point of organisms, learning, growing and adapting.

>>919883
computers recognize faces because they use non-linear systems in them- non-linearity is a function of right brains.

>>919882
If A, and B = !A, then B != A. There can be contradictions in telling because of multiple paths or outcomes, there can be contradictions because people inject their own prejudices and pattern recognizingly analysis, and there can even be contradictions from simple physical perspective/exposed data, but there cannot be multiple truths. Something can be multiple things, but the truth about it is singular.

>>919883
>Computers can recognize faces
>as if computers are actually conscious of a face.

Delusion is reality.

Even if it is some galactic conspiracy or computer simulation or etc. etc. etc. - it's still all we have to go on. This is the game we've been given to play, so what is there to do but to play it?

Spinoza said reality is perfect, and failure to perceive it as such is a failure of perception (or words to that effect). Maybe the problem isn't with the universe, whatever set that up (even if it's just the power of chaotic random chance) is a lot bigger than people.

Maybe the problem is with people and the imaginary realities we set up for ourselves.

>>919894
What are you trying to say here? Are you insinuating that logical programs must be run in a linear fashion?

>>919889
Actually the purpose of every organism is to propagate, nothing more, nothing less. Learning is simply one method that serves some organisms in their niche well.

>>919898
>Something can be multiple things, but the truth about it is singular.

well if every person has there own perspective that is necessarily subjective and every perspective renders a given thing to be different isnt it a leap of faith to suppose that there is a singular truth behind it? Supposing there is without proof begs the question

>>919905
How would you know if one was?

>>919908
>This is the game we've been given to play
>we

That's where you're wrong.

It's just you.

>>919914
>the purpose of every organism is to propagate, nothing more, nothing less.

well if it were that simple where do tv's fit it? The shit has nothing to do with propagation at all.

>>919905
>Implying humans are conscious

A human sees a face, it causes them to search through their memories for one that matches, they find one that matches and it drags up internal links to conversations, basic data about the person and potential greetings. A computer can do all this.

>>919917
Not really. A frog is on a road, it is run over by a truck. From the frogs perspective a malicious being tried to run it over and succeeded. From the turtle on the side of the road's perspective a frog was accidentally run over by a truck. From the Truckers perspective nothing happened.

Absolute truth: A frog was run over by a truck.

Multiple perspectives don't change the actual event, they may color the future actions of a person making the singular event into multiple possibilities in a sense since everyone will react differently, but the event itself was a singular piece. It happened one way and one way only. If it did not happen then all the conflicting perspectives wouldn't exist at all.

>>919914
>Are you insinuating that logical programs must be run in a linear fashion?
im saying that non-linear systems are apprehended by the right brain and linear systems by the left.

>Actually the purpose of every organism is to propagate, nothing more, nothing less.

right, and being on 4chan is helping you propagate right now, right?

The fact that people choose not to have kids flies in the face that all organisms are driven by genes and they're minds have no choice in the matter.

>>919935
Every action doesn't need to be oriented towards the primary objective. The T.V. was invented because someone found pleasure in inventing things, pleasure helps us mate because we look for happy mates and are more likely to live longer productively when happy. When they sold the T.V. others were able to make money that attracted mates for them and helped insure their offspring got an advantage.

And humans are a bad example when talking about life because we have gotten to the point of truly meddling with our genetic urges by being able to create things that directly stimulate our pleasure centers in the brain, something very recent in our history.

>>919936
>blah blah blah blah blah blah. A computer can do all this.

a computer can do all of it because it was fashioned by a human. Years ago they used to say that the mind was a catapult because that was the most advanced piece of technology they had. Half a century ago it was the steam engine that the mind was most like (and the therapies applied by such logic led to the death of alan turing, one of the greatest war heroes of all time), and now we have the computer to misunderstand out minds with, because thats the most advanced piece of technology we have. And everytime we get another advanced piece of technology we degrade human qualities and compare them to catapults and steme engines and computers, and no one ever notices that these technologies are just extentsions of human faculties, and that is all.

>>919958
computers existed more than half a century ago

>>919836
>>919836
you know for a guy who so keen on 'perception being limited' you sure are a twat about pressing your conclusions on other people

>>919973
HERP DER, IM GOING TO COMPARE ABACUS COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY TO THE RISE OF ELECTRONIC CIRCUITRY IN THE 20TH CENTURY

>>919973
Your right but it never occured to anyone to compare them to human minds until alan turing did right before he killed himself.

>>919975
youd think a guy who deals in limited perception would be a discordian, not some existentialist cunt.

human minds are obviously like apples, all the rest of you are fucktarded

>>919987
id rather he be a discordian then an existentialist cunt

human minds are like trees in central africa- when in danger and being eaten by giraffes, these trees ACTUALLY recognize that they're being eaten by giraffes, think to themselves 'well gosh i better do something about this', start secreting a chemical that tells other tree that there are giraffes in the are, and all the trees throw chemicals in there leaves that kill the giraffes who eat them.

>>919996
word up son.

why arent you a discordian, mr. existentialist cunt?

>>920008
existentialist cunt called me, he said he was butthurt and left 4chan to go wallow in his existentialist sorrow.

>>919981

I'm here, just had to go do something else, I'll reply after I finish getting some food.

>>920060
Ok, back.

>>919958
That arguement makes no sense, would comparing a father to his son be dehumanizing to the father? Computers are the children of human capabilities, we endow them with all we possibly can and they can actually approximate the human mind in many ways already. Further more steam engines cannot do calculations, they cannot change their internal code but computers and programs can.

>>919948
Both of which are controlled by forms of logic. Non-linear computation is still computation. It's like saying the GPU of a computer is completely different from the CPU. They go about their tasks in different ways but both are based on the same basic logic and both work together to produce a logic based answer.

>>919987
Why? I don't get why I should be?