[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 98 KB, 983x752, 72443142324.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14231881 No.14231881 [Reply] [Original]

How do you personally feel about the hard problem of conciseness, and specifically the claims that there is no hard problem? That our subjective experiences are explainable by physical/scientific means, qualia don't exist, we're purely physical, etc. Basically the mind-body problem being "solved" by positions like eliminative materialism.

If we're really just physical beings, why do I have so much existential dread bros? Aren't thoughts just an illusion?

>> No.14231893

They feel confused and retreat into needless complexity.

What is your dread over?

>> No.14231917

Seems like a reasonable position.

But who cares, really?

>> No.14231931

op, never fall for eliminative materialism, it is as self defeating as you imagine. there is a hard problem.
>>14231893
shut the everloving fuck up

>> No.14231944

>>14231931
I see no solution offered
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LtywNeF8dCM

>> No.14231964

>>14231881
you got memed

>> No.14231971

>>14231944
no solution offered to what? the hard problem? if I solved the hard problem I would be world famous not shit posting on lit with the likes of you. but, since you are in classic flippant posturing mode, give us a breakdown on the hard problem and it's solutions. enlighten me, please.

>> No.14231981

You cannot say "our subjective experiences[qualia] are explainable by physical/scientific means" whilst also saying "qualia don't exist".

Consciousness existing as an illusion is not the same thing as consciousness not existing.

>> No.14231986

>>14231944
>>14231893
fag

>> No.14232047

>>14231986
Your dread is over being a homosexual?

>> No.14232066

>>14231881
the answer is non-duality, OP
That should cure your existential dread.
You are not the body, you are not your thoughts

>> No.14232077
File: 830 KB, 250x250, 4F09BEBD-B639-4A7C-B831-ECDA260A90CC.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14232077

>>14232066
So what does this little thought exercise lead you to?

>> No.14232079

>>14231981
what does it mean for consciouness to be an illusion then? either qualia doesn't exists, or it exists but is totally epiphenomenal and therefore has no value (even evolutionarily speaking), or it exists and has value and Dennett is full of shit

>> No.14232084

>>14232077
don't skip me butterfly
give me a breakdown on the proposed solutions to the hard problem already

>> No.14232088

>>14232084
What are you having trouble with?
Who is the OP?

>> No.14232090

>>14231881
Dualism is so fucking retarded it makes me pepeepoo my pants.
If there is one thing I can give Sartre is that he atleast tried to place the person in the "here-now" instead of all the other gaabaagoooba bullshit people tend to wank it to.

>> No.14232096

>>14232088
again, this should be VERY easy for you, give a breakdown on the hard problem and your supposed solution. you do know what you are talking about, right?

>> No.14232124

>>14232096
I am not an accredited philosophy major, so this “Hard Problem” you’re using to snicker at with is helping you with a laugh.
Answer the question with your question anytime

>> No.14232131

>>14232124
okay I don't even know what the fuck this post is supposed to mean but you are in a thread specifically about the hard problem, are you drunk or in mid stroke or something

>> No.14232145
File: 258 KB, 1643x1209, 5C0DA5AC-6ACB-46AD-932F-65CF5398010A.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14232145

>>14232131
Take your time. Cleaning bathroom.

>> No.14232150

>>14232145
I'm not OP you literal retard, this is me
>>14231931
>>14231971
>>14232084
>>14232096
>>14232131
put down the wine bottle auntie, you know you aren't supposed to drink on your Alzheimer's meds

>> No.14232152

"All men's miseries derive from not being able to sit in a quiet room alone."
Blaise Pascal

>> No.14232157

>>14232079
I think you're using the word "exists" a bit too vaguely, here. Be more specific.

>> No.14232163

>>14232157
existence is a binary mode, how is it unspecific?

>> No.14232201

>>14232077
Profound peace, complete non fear of death and oblivion, as well as imperturbability in the face of the transience of life, to name a few things. Non-dual realization is also typically characterized by bliss, profound existential freedom, and a boundless capacity for compassion towards others.

>> No.14232213

>>14232150
I’m literally talking to you and wondering about the OP.
AT THE SAME TIME! WEE. :D

>>14232152
Says more about his life than anything really.

>>14232201
>One can only find peace through the illusion that they are immortal
I find this dubious

>> No.14232223

>>14232145
>>14232213
>won't even admit they replied to the wrong person
you are so intellectually bankrupt it's actually depressing. if you demand to be an unread psude at least have a shred of honesty

>> No.14232244

>>14232213
>One can only find peace through the illusion that they are immortal
This is not at all what non-dual teachings are pointing at. Immortality is not promised.

>> No.14232273

>>14232223
One away. Better luck next time.

>>14232244
It seems to conjure up a spirit, essence? No fear of death and transience of life? Maybe I misunderstood. Pardon if so.

>> No.14232288
File: 79 KB, 554x858, Kuan-yan_bodhisattva,_Northern_Sung_dynasty,_China,_c._1025,_wood,_Honolulu_Academy_of_Arts.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14232288

>>14232213
>>One can only find peace through the illusion that they are immortal
Ah but it is precisely the opposite. It is the illusion of the immortal and independent selfhood of the mind and personality, that fuels existential dread. If there is no identification with that which is impermanent and subject to change, there will be no fear or difficulty when they disintegrate and eventually pass away.

>> No.14232304

>>14232163
Okay good, so by your definition, it sounds like you think consciousness exists. Because, regardless of their cause/function, your OP accepts the existence of subjective experiences.

(To believe consciousness doesn't exist would require thinking subjective experiences do not exist.)

I have yet to see a single eliminative materialist argue this convincingly.

>> No.14232316

Penrose-Lukas argument.
And ORCH-OR

>> No.14232350

>>14232316

The mind is quantum =/= the mind doesn't exist

>> No.14232388

>>14232304
the question of the hard problem relates specifically to the status of qualia more so than "consciousness" in the broad sense, but yes, EM is untenable.

>> No.14232410

>>14232273
>It seems to conjure up a spirit, essence?
For some, yea. I know at least in Buddhism it’s actually the absence of any permanent/abiding essence that they emphasize. Emptiness and all that. Not to say they’re materialist, but they don’t really have any substance metaphysics at all

>> No.14232418

>>14232388
Was this supposed to be a reply to me?

>> No.14232460

>>14231981
There's a big difference between supposing that subjective experience is an emergent physical phenomenon (quanta) and supposing that it's a non-physical event which corresponds to supposed universals. It is these latter assumptions which are disputed when qualia is claimed to not exist. I think this is fair, because those assumptions are almost always invoked where the term 'qualia' is employed. The theoretical neutrality you imply never seems to be the case in practice.

>> No.14232467

>>14232418
yes, whether consciousness exists or nor is beside the point, as the stakes of the problem lie in qualia. Dennett would agree that consciousness exists, but he would say it is illusory because qualia does not exist. the hard problem itself already assumes consciousness is real, it's literally called the hard problem of consciousness. it's pedantic but it matters to the pedantry that is philosophy of mind

>> No.14232529

>>14231881
>Science understands small portion of reality
>Pseudo-Scientists say "See? We know everything, dummy!"
>It doesn't actually explain everything
Such as it has been since dawn of civilization. Religious Pseudo-Priests and Pseudo-Philosophers do the same thing.

>> No.14233204

This thread was moved to >>>/b/814835664