/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15578361]

Literally and unironically HOW do you explain the concept of human beings having consciousness, being able to make decisions, experiencing thoughts and feelings, without necessitating the existence of the human soul?

If the human soul didn't exist, we wouldn't be able to make decisions, I wouldn't be able to think or type this up, we would just be relying on cortical reactions to basic biological needs like food and sex.

[Anonymous No.15578366]

>>15578361
the brain

[Anonymous No.15578373]

Another question: if the human soul doesn't exist, then literally how is there any immorality towards murdering a human being? If humans are just a lump of flesh and cells reacting to atomic stimuli, then how is killing someone any different to chopping a block of wood?

[Anonymous No.15578380]

>>15578366
But the brain is just a bunch of cells. What is creating the input in those cells to make them make the reactions that make you think or move? If its just molecules reacting that make our thoughts or decisions, then we wouldn't be able to make thoughts or decisions of our own independent choice, it would be no different to other organs like the liver just producing molecules in reaction to chemical stimuli.

[Anonymous No.15578398]

>>15578373
It isn't.

[Anonymous No.15578408]

>>15578380
You're getting into whether humans have free will or not. No one knows the answer to that. Every action we do may be just the because of the complex programming of our DNA and brains. We may believe we have free will, but it could just be an illusion.

[Anonymous No.15578422]

>>15578373
>how is killing someone any different to chopping a block of wood
Literally nothing. Morality does not exist in the universe. It sees no difference between the chopping of wood, from the destruction of an entire planet.

[Anonymous No.15578470]

>>15578361
What is a soul OP? What about it makes it so special and elevates it beyond mere matter?

[Anonymous No.15578484]

very bold of you to assume that we have an answer to any of those questions you packed into that post
of course by "very bold" I mean "a touch retarded"

[Anonymous No.15578496]

>>15578373
You're forgetting that most morals are codified from pragmatic lessons.
Incest is immoral because it causes deformities.
There's a pragmatic reason for it.
There's plenty of pragmatic reasons not to murder a human being, even beyond the risk of 'getting caught' and suffering retribution. Most notably that in a small community if you kill someone, that's one able bodied man less worth of work that the community can get done!

[Anonymous No.15578548]

>>15578361
See Maximus the Confessor on the Logos and logoi.

[Anonymous No.15578554]

>>15578548
pragmatic dualism by psuedointellectuals what new

[Anonymous No.15578572]

>>15578496
What's best for our survival etc does not make morals
That's just humans wanting to survive as a species
there is no real morality

[Anonymous No.15578580]

>>15578361
It’s complicated.

[Anonymous No.15578595]

>>15578572
I don't think they're arguing whether morals are objectively real. Morals are man made, they exist in the human consciousness, and some of the morals we've constructed do benefit survival as a species.

[Anonymous No.15578608]

>>15578554
what

[Anonymous No.15578614]

>>15578572
What's your point?

[Anonymous No.15578620]

>>15578595
Okay then, but I think that's what OP is asking/ wondering about. Whether morality has any ground in objective reality

[Anonymous No.15578738]

>>15578408
I would argue it depends on the nature of what time really is, and because we cannot comprehend what time really is, humans will never know the answer.

[Anonymous No.15578934]

>>15578738
see human condition fuck face

[Anonymous No.15578937]

>>15578373
If other people are allowed to be murdered then it is a short step away from you being murdered too

[Anonymous No.15578978]

>>15578361
The thing I hate the most about the midwits of /lit/, and maybe calling people like you midwit is over rating you, is that you don't even bother to try to study science before asking these questions.
Instead of asking /lit/ this you should try reading neuroscience if you want to know how the brain works.

>>15578373
>then how is killing someone any different to chopping a block of wood?
It isn't, read The Unique and Its Property.

[Anonymous No.15578980]

Humans have a complex nervous system compared to other animals.
Realistically, all we do is respond to stimulus, like any other animal. We however do so in an incredibly complex way, and can (albeit imperfectly) store and sift through previous stimuli, and use that in our current responses.
If this is a 'soul', then you must also entertain the possibility that intelligent animals similarly have a soul, or so would any equally intelligent species somewhere in the universe.
I have yet to see any evidence that there is a 'ghost in the machine'.

[Anonymous No.15578981]

>>15578978
>is that you don't even bother to try to study science before asking these questions.
this!

[Anonymous No.15579068]

>>15578978
>>15578554
>>15578484
>>15578366
Fags

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness
2. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/#CasAgaPhyIQuaCon

[Anonymous No.15579082]

>>15579068
+

3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_argument
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_brain
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6GmCyKylTw

[Anonymous No.15579215]

>>15579068
>1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness
How are subjective experiences any problem? Our body reacts to an stimulus and the way to react is for the brain to create what we call subjective experience, like feeling cold when our body temperature is being lowered.
This seem so easy to explain under a physicalist view I don't understand who would propose this problem.
>2. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/#CasAgaPhyIQuaCon
I read this and the arguments for physicalism explained here are much more convincing than those against it in the same page.
I won't read more of your links, my only impression is that you want to believe in fantasies because you want to feel more special than just matter so you force yourself not to agree with physicalism.

[Anonymous No.15579587]

>>15578361
Pantheism. Consciousness as a base property of matter from which complex thought, sense, and memory are emergent phenomena. Necessitates some primal universal "life force" but not the individual soul.

[Anonymous No.15579606]

>>15578361
Global consciousness and the soul exists.

http://gcpdot.com/
Don't strongly interpret the dot!

[Anonymous No.15579793]

>>15578361
The Engineers.

[Anonymous No.15579906]

>>15578361
I really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really wish you had to be 18+ and have finished at least primary education to post on /lit/

[Anonymous No.15579921]

>>15578373
welcome to ethics