/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18938465]

The material world is all that exists and if you think differently you’re literally schizophrenic

[Anonymous No.18938469]

Why does any scientist think they can ever substantiate the immaterial? It's a fool's errand.

[Anonymous No.18938470]

There’s a post where you literally can’t distinguish the two so...

[Anonymous No.18938473]

>>18938465
This is like the fourth time you’ve posted this thread this week.

[Anonymous No.18938490]

>>18938465
>renowned physicist
He's literally just a fucking tv personality

[Anonymous No.18938497]

No.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18938517]

>>18938469
Because it’s easy. You yourself know the “immaterial” is just a thought footprint in the brain.
Don’t you?

>>18938473
I know. Tiresome isn’t it?

[Anonymous No.18938527]

>>18938465
You just proposed an idea which by itself is immaterial, hypocrite.

[Anonymous No.18938539]

>>18938497
funny how shit like this, the boltzmann brain, the uncertainty principle and a lot of other physics shit just feels like a cope for agnostics and atheists to cope with the concept of death.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18938542]

>>18938527
>Heaven is when your ideas float to non-space with every other thought

[Anonymous No.18938548]

>>18938542
did Věra and those two girls actually go around trolling bureaucrats in that film?
i'm like 99% sure it wasn't acting.

[Anonymous No.18938553]

>>18938469
>Why does any scientist think they can ever substantiate the immaterial? It's a fool's errand.
Everyone who talks about soul, especially on /lit/, substantiate it. Materialists are more consequent than most in that they realize that this conception is contradictory, they are however more close-minded in that they refuse to see beyond it toward the possibility of an unsubstantiated *anything*.
>>18938465
>The material world is all that exists
There is at least also information, which can be reduced as a specific arrangement of matter useful (as signs) for other specific arrangement of matter (the interpreter).
But this also opens up the question of the content of the information. In many cases you'll be able to point out to an object in the world as a referral point, but in many cases you wont be able to.
The classic example is universals. If you take the proposition "This horse is healthy", depending on the context, we know you'll refer to a real horse, or perhaps a fictional one. The horse exists. This is much less clear with the horse of the proposition "All horses are noble beasts".
But you can take it further than that. Take your center of gravity. This is a fictional entity, but somehow I can point in the general direction of it on your body? Both propositions "Your center of gravity is around here" (pointing at were it would be) and "You can never isolate a center of gravity, never hold it, never see it" are true.
So the second you understand that matter is not fully sufficient, that you need at least something like information, the real/ideal dichotomy opens up again and you will be forced to acknowledge fictional entities and immaterial objects in your world.

[Anonymous No.18938559]

>>18938553
materialism v idealism is a false dichotomy.

[Anonymous No.18938560]

>>18938539
If they take their ideas to their logical conclusions then they should be more terrified than most of the religious believers: Because there is nothing guaranteeing they won't revert into consciousness in the most horrid states of existence for many millions or billions of years (especially if we go along with the idea that humanity and sapient life is a very isolated and rare phenomenon at the universal level). Hope you enjoy being chopped up as baby chicks or cattle for the majority of your conscious existence, atheists.

[Anonymous No.18938561]

>>18938527
This.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18938563]

>>18938548
Hehe Borat style. Nice.

[Anonymous No.18938565]

>>18938539
Those ideas scare atheists and agnostics.
Most would rather nothing. You're an idiot.

[Anonymous No.18938568]

>>18938553
>they realize that this conception is contradictory
No they don't, they claim it is contradictory.

[Anonymous No.18938569]

>>18938465
excellent schizo bait thread. guaranteed 150+ replies with gigantic paragraphs about how their mentally ill headcanon IS reality

[Anonymous No.18938572]

>>18938560
i unironically think this is how karma and reincarnation works and I'm trying to be a good person.

not like, on the terms of religious texts though but on my own terms. I guess I'm an immoralist in the nietzschean sense- I would murder people to achieve my goals, but actually hurting other people is not my goal.

i also think desire is good and suffering is great and so the buddhists are definitely wrong in that regard. I might get into hindu philosophy later in life, we'll see.

i'm also god too so that's weird

[Anonymous No.18938575]

>>18938565
Being scared is subconsciously preferable than not having a conscious at all. Get it? Your brain is literally designed to cope with this fact. It's obvious with how even the most hardcore determinists always end an idea with "well despite this..." and follow the thought with something positive.

[Anonymous No.18938582]

>>18938572
le quirky schizo softboy has arrived

[Anonymous No.18938583]

>>18938575
>hardcore determinists always end an idea with "well despite this..." and follow the thought with something positive
what do you mean?

[Anonymous No.18938595]

>>18938568
If soul is immaterial from the start, then it shouldn't be associated with the body or bodily functions in any shape or form. By simply linking it to biological functions with the question of life and death, (you) (and everyone else, for that matter), substantiate it.

[Anonymous No.18938603]

>>18938465
Bugman physics

[Anonymous No.18938604]

>>18938465
Wait how do you disprove the soul with particle physics? Thats like saying you disproved the concept of the number 3 with physics

[Anonymous No.18938612]

>>18938497
cope
why do you people have such a hard time accepting that after you die its over?

[Anonymous No.18938614]

>>18938563
I mean I'm not sure, I just feel that way. I have to find Czech articles and interviews on it. I mean I guess the banquet was a setup, they would have gotten into BIG trouble if that was real.

But the way everything is shot, the way the camera zooms out from some static location in the dinner scenes, or when the onlookers were staring at the two Maries in the cabaret- all their pranks just seems so real to me.

I'm also 99% sure Věra was lesbian or at the very least bi, the two Maries also- and the cutting up of the phalic objects when that phone call was going on was just a metaphor that they don't swing that way.

And if the above is true then there's also probably naked footage of the girls (heh heh).

This is all just my speculation, there isn't really many information on the creation of the film I could find.

[Anonymous No.18938622]

>>18938465
I'll give u one dollar for yours, if you're really looking to get rid of it.

[Anonymous No.18938625]

>>18938595
>If soul is immaterial from the start, then it shouldn't be associated with the body or bodily functions in any shape or form.
Read the Platonists. The soul is like the sun, it acts without being acted upon and its rays spread through everything that will effectively receive it, without in the slightest altering the source (sun/soul) itself. Soul being immaterial is just like ideas being immaterial: They are projected into materiality but they do not adhere to it. For almost the exact same reason we will never be able to find physical ideas, yet ideas exist and are projected into materiality (although without the idea itself actually being put into materiality). Death is simply the matter of our bodies no longer being sufficiently receptive of the "illuminating rays" of the soul.

[Anonymous No.18938630]

>>18938582
i am not softboy. i have a lust for power and aspire to be like kali, but it makes me feel bad.

[Anonymous No.18938631]

>>18938604
I'm guessing their argument is if the soul exist it must be something that can be measurable/observable.

[Anonymous No.18938637]

>>18938612
I would be content with becoming nothing, but you, me—everyone will never enjoy the embrace of death for more than a fleeting moment.

[Anonymous No.18938640]

>>18938575
>Being scared is subconsciously preferable
Not if what you fear is some infinite pain state at death.
Go look at what LessWrong thinks about these concepts. They fear it as much as the basilisk.

[Anonymous No.18938643]

Is there a definitive book studying this sort of non-philosophy?

>>18938612
There is no "accepting" or "cope" here. By framing everything in those terms you already shut down any reflection. I could just as well frame your position in terms of cope.

>>18938614
What you say seems obvious enough but we'll never know.

[Anonymous No.18938645]

>>18938465
Naturalism was a mistake
Let's go back anons, there's only darkness before us.

[Anonymous No.18938646]

>>18938465
>a materialist think everything is material

[Anonymous No.18938654]

>>18938583
I'm speaking about science philosophers, like Dawkins, Nye, Harris and so on, who like to project subjective thoughts on scientific concepts; something that's a big "no-no" in science papers. Just the action alone of projecting meaning in a deterministic idea goes against the concept of it. That's why they've been trying to draw a line between the fatalistic mindset that comes with determinism and the scientific concept of it, which in itself goes against the core realization of the subject. In the end it all comes back to the deep rooted primordial fear of death and suffering of a self-realized consciousness.

[Anonymous No.18938672]

>>18938625
> Biological bodies are antenna's for the soul's radiowave, when they break down they can't get a good signal anymore. But that signal is magical and you can't pinpoint it.
And you wonder why the fuck materialists laugh at such conceptions?
This is insulting to Plato, btw. We are talking about a genius at the beginning of historical thought trying to lay the very foundation of all science. His descriptions are analogical in nature, they try to render reality in a way that the language was not prepared to do so. Don't take him in light of neoplatonism, but of husserlian idealism.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18938679]

>>18938614
>they would have gotten into BIG trouble if that was real.
The government used that wasted food as a pretext to ban her from filmmaking actually.
The homo subtext is oh so subtle and sweet to me.
Ivana gets naked enough.
I would also like to hear some in depth discussion from Věra too.

[Anonymous No.18938684]

>>18938469
>Why does any scientist think they can ever substantiate the immaterial? It's a fool's errand.

They just call it "dark matter" then it becomes really real.

[Anonymous No.18938701]

>>18938622
fuck you milhouse

[Anonymous No.18938713]

>>18938672
I quoted Plato almost word for word. There's nothing embarrassing about it, you're just trying to cover up your lack of counter-argument.
> We are talking about a genius at the beginning of historical thought trying to lay the very foundation of all science. His descriptions are analogical in nature, they try to render reality in a way that the language was not prepared to do so. Don't take him in light of neoplatonism, but of husserlian idealism.
Very naive understanding of Plato, and it doesn't match at all with his express statements in the Republic.

[Anonymous No.18938725]

>>18938713
>Very naive understanding of Plato
> Doesn't know the Republic is an exoteric text.

[Anonymous No.18938744]

Yes, we're fully aware of the corrupted narrative the corporations are pushing in (current year + n), thank you.

[Anonymous No.18938745]

>>18938684
With dark matter you can at least observe it's effect (gravity) on things that we can see.

At the end of the day nearly every civilization across the globe has had some sort of belief in some version of a soul. This can be chalked up to people being afraid of death and the notion that you just cease to exist forever. If so, why were early version of the afterlife in places like Sumer and Greece absolutely miserable places? Even the people of the time described the places as dreary places where nobody is happy and everyone from the lowest born to the greatest hero goes there. The kindest way to look at it is that what science can't detect human intuition can.

[Anonymous No.18938750]

>>18938725
Have you read the Tübingen School's reconstruction of Plato's esoteric doctrines? No? Then you should stop pretending like Husserl is worth anything more than idle ramblings, and that The Republic is somehow not connected with his greater corpus of teachings.

[Anonymous No.18938760]

>>18938684
Dark matter isn't "immaterial", it just doesn't interact with the electromagnetic force. You can still "observe" it through gravitational lensing, for example.

[Anonymous No.18938769]

>nooooo I'm sure souls exist because.... LE JESUS GOD BIBLE.... learn2immaterial you materialist atheist...
>what do you mean "do immaterial ghosts exist all around us then" what is that even supposed to mean lol

[Anonymous No.18938799]

>>18938745
>to the greatest hero goes there.
Not every hero. Odysseus had the potential for immortality if he chose it.

[Anonymous No.18938802]

>>18938769
Are you saying there aren't ghosts all around us? Get a load of this guy.

[Anonymous No.18938806]

>>18938760
Why did you put "observe" in quotations. Are you implying they're not really observing it? The argument that they can infer its existence from the action of things around it can likewise be used to justify love or a soul. Other arguments that "it may be composed of some as-yet undiscovered subatomic particles" as Cox might, for example, also open the door for the same possibility that a mysterious undiscovered soul particle might be down there somewhere.

[Anonymous No.18938822]

>>18938745
>soul exist because you are afraid of death
this is one of the most retarded ideas i ever listen. in fact you can say the scientific project and his hopes and cooperativeness to follow the project are because a fear of death too.
people who dont understand and missinterpret the concept of sovl are the soulless people around. scientists are so desperate to win to religion and have the throne of TRUTH that they seem childish in their approach to human life and experience.

[Anonymous No.18938831]

>"heh yeah our science experiments proved that God doesn't exist, now let's advance society further than ever before"
>Push degenerate ideologies
>Become morally corrupt and awful human beings
Every time. Satan works hard, boys. Keep your head up

[Anonymous No.18938845]

>>18938831
Name Christian (or other religious) nations devoid of degeneracy

[Anonymous No.18938855]

>>18938822
The fear of death thing was my way of trying to interpret how materialists/atheists view the concept of soul. It's not my personal view of the soul.

[Anonymous No.18938857]

>>18938845
Being religious doesn't mean you're perfect

[Anonymous No.18938865]

>>18938857
Religious degeneracy = good
Atheism = bad
Wrote it down so I can remember

[Anonymous No.18938868]

>>18938465
is consciousness material?

[Anonymous No.18938870]

>>18938517
You a degenerate materialists butters?

[Anonymous No.18938873]

>>18938845
There are no Christian nations.

[Anonymous No.18938875]

>>18938569
Go get another job, so you can buy more shit bugman.

[Anonymous No.18938876]

>>18938865
Religious degeneracy = you still go to hell
Religious piety = salvation
Write this instead bro

[Anonymous No.18938889]

>>18938612
The suffering never ends anon. We would be so lucky that there was nothing.

[Anonymous No.18938892]

>>18938873
>not real Christianity bro
I also gave you an opportunity to name countries of some other religion but you didn't name any.

[Anonymous No.18938894]

why do people think idealism v materialism is a debate even worthy to have? what difference does it really make? everything you experience is a product of consciousness and you can't scientifically prove where consciousness begins or ends.

anyway an idealist would just say the material world is just an expression of spirit and an unfolding of the absolute.

stupid debate

[Anonymous No.18938900]

>>18938892
I dont care about other religions. Why should I? You can't name a single Christian nation yet you want me to name one?

[Anonymous No.18938903]

>>18938892
That's not how it works but good try

[Anonymous No.18938920]

>>18938892
The only nations run by religion are in the middle east.

[Anonymous No.18938929]

>>18938920
>>18938903
>>18938900
Do you even read what you responding to or what?

[Anonymous No.18938937]

>>18938929
Nope. I wasn't even the guy you were talking to and I was just responding to the last post.

[Anonymous No.18938948]

>>18938889
This guy gets it.
Self awareness is born then endless.
The ride literally never ends.
This is not a good thing.

[Anonymous No.18938951]

>>18938855
i think materialist see soul as santa claus, an ancient and erroneus global ideation of oneself that they want to correct. i dont think they gone too far from that.

[Anonymous No.18938962]

>>18938951
It's funny how their go to insult against any religion is santa claus or sky daddy.

[Anonymous No.18938964]

It's funny when reddit thinks they can measure something that can't be measured.

[Anonymous No.18938972]

>>18938469
Anything different than the Richard Feynman answer "I can't argue it" is trash.

[Anonymous No.18938973]

Why are so many on stormfront and /pol/ such science deniers?
You will see a denial of evolution, a denial of climate change, disbelief in vaccination, adamant belief in the little bible they were raised on etc.

Most of these "white nationalists" also have an 18th century view and think race is some objective fact. They refuse to listen to established scientists and intellectual titans like Bill Nye, Richard Dawkins and Brian Cox. As well as all modern biology classes etc.
I hope white nationalists can educate themselves and graduate from being ignorant white nationalists.

[Anonymous No.18938987]

>>18938973
Nice bait. I hope you repent so God can forgive you.

[Anonymous No.18938990]

>>18938973
I really hope this is bait. I'm not white nor am I racist. Also, your post is straight garbage. No one you mentioned is worth a second of anyone's time

[Anonymous No.18938993]

>>18938465
A very plebian attitude, which is incorrect.

>>18938973
This. And don't they realize that j*ws and blacks and chinese are literally the most racist group anyways? so shouldn't these evil drumpf-supporting nazis like these "subhumans"?

[Anonymous No.18939034]

>>18938973
> You will see a denial of evolution, a denial of climate change, disbelief in vaccination, adamant belief in the little bible they were raised on etc.
How they were raised and the media they consume. That's it. No decent thought processes get a person there; it's drilled in early and it sticks because it becomes a feedback loop where they'll just seek out more and more sources that tell them what they want to hear.

[Anonymous No.18939042]

>>18938973
>my skin and your skin is a consequence of ultraviolet light, of latitude and climate
this is the theory behind the creation of different species. he gonna negate different species too?. im not racist though, but people go beyond retarded to adapt to their social environment.

[Anonymous No.18939137]

the real take on this materialism vs idealism debate is that if the "ideal" dimension exists, we certainly have no way of accessing it, so why bother? materialism doesn't mean that idealism is wrong, it just means focusing on what we can actually manipulate and be affected by.

[Anonymous No.18939141]

>>18939137
this is the "ideal dimension". learn to love yourself.

[Anonymous No.18939307]

>>18938469
They're really just responding to claims made by others, for example, if you say the soul has an influence over the body then you're also saying the soul interacts with the body and since the body is made out of atoms, then what you're really saying is that the soul interacts with atoms so it's something that can be detected
While is not possible to refute the existence of the "inmaterial" entirely, specific claims can be tested and refuted

[Anonymous No.18939343]

>>18938625
>The soul is like the sun, it acts without being acted upon and its rays spread through everything that will effectively receive it, without in the slightest altering the source (sun/soul) itself
That's a terrible analogy, the light from the sun comes comes from a reduction in mass from the sun itself, you're just arguing that the idea of the soul as something immaterial comes just from our ignorance about the true workings of the soul

[Anonymous No.18939350]

>>18939137
This is the complete opposite of the truth. Idealism in its purest forms (say Husserl) is not posing transcendent judgements and keep to the accessible.
It is also strange to directly oppose it to materialism. It seems you use idealism to mean anything else than materialism which is hardly a standard use of the word. You then boldly claim that we have no way of accessing anything immaterial. You can access yourself in an infinitely better way than anything material. Arguably material things are not properly accessed depending on semantic games about whether it is the objects or contents of propositions that are said to be "accessed".

[Anonymous No.18939354]

>>18938868
If it weren't then would drugs and injury be able to affect your consciousness?

[Anonymous No.18939383]

>>18938517
>Because it’s easy
then provide concrete evidence that what we perceive as material is all there is

[Anonymous No.18939836]

>>18939354
is it necessary that material can only affect other material?

[Anonymous No.18939927]

>>18938630
you sound like a faggot softboy trying to be edgy

[Anonymous No.18939932]

>>18938517
i think getting pregnant would fix you tbdesu

[Anonymous No.18939939]

>>18938604
>i cant see it under a microscope therefore it is not real
seperation of science from philosophy and religion was a mistake

[Anonymous No.18939951]

>>18938973
>Bill nye
you pushed it too far, dial it back and more anons will take the bait

[Anonymous No.18939963]

>>18938806
I'm another poster, but I'm sure he did that because observe in the context of physics is different to what many people understand by observe, which is watching with your eyes.
>The argument that they can infer its existence from the action of things around it can likewise be used to justify love or a soul.
Explain this hypothesis in some way and make an experiment that can be reliably reproduced by other people that proves it.
Then people will believe you.
>Other arguments that "it may be composed of some as-yet undiscovered subatomic particles" as Cox might, for example, also open the door for the same possibility that a mysterious undiscovered soul particle might be down there somewhere.
Luckily unlike dark matter, such soul particles could be easily found by investigating people, who are easy to get by.
Just make an experiment to prove them.

[Anonymous No.18939968]

>>18939836
If material can affect the immaterial and the immaterial affect the material as a response then the immaterial can be detected and measured

[Anonymous No.18939979]

>>18938497
this even reads like it's written by an 8th grader lmao

[Anonymous No.18939988]

>>18939354
Yes.

There is a (subjective) empirical link between material conditions and subjective consciousness. This is obvious when you do drugs.

Clearly, the actual generated experience is tied irrevocably to the material conditions of the brain. The problem is actually observing the subjective experience materially... which hasn't been done and probably will never be done.

What type of atom composes subjective consciousness? Where is it physically stored? We know it is affected by material conditions but we do not know if it is in fact material. We have dissected countless human brains, and seem many in vitro during brain surgery, and have found no evidence of human consciousness as a material phenomenon.

Some people say consciousness exists as an epiphenomenon, an illusion. It exists in the same way the concept of blood flow exists-- only conceptually. But lived experience contradicts this, because subjective experience is to subjective consciousness the most real thing that possibly exists.

I'm convinced that the hard problem of consciousness is the most important gap in human knowledge at this moment in history. It is also the best evidence for the existence of some immaterial component to reality. I don't think we will make much progress in my lifetime.

[Anonymous No.18939999]

>>18939968
The problem here is that with the hard problem the component of subjective experience can be seen as entirely illusory from an empirical epistemology. We can explain the brain entirely including all behavior, and there would be no need for meaningfully extant subjective consciousness.

But, as creatures that experience subjective consciousness, we know that subjective consciousness exists in a meaningful sense, and is in fact the "most real" thing that exists from our own perspectives as all perception is a product of it.

Measuring material conditions that are explained by other material conditions shows no reason to believe in subjective consciousness. Yet we know, axiomatically, that it does exist. Cogito ergo sum.

[Anonymous No.18940007]

>>18939979
It's steeped in a stupid sort of mysticism, but I think there's an honest idea there.

If, after death, we return to the same nothingness in which we existed before we were born, who is to say that we will not emerge from that nothingness into consciousness again? There are no understood rules here-- and if it happened once, why is there a limit on the number of times?