[ 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: 46 KB, 634x1000, 0C7D7AE1-2ABD-481E-98D9-0FE625C6BEE6.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22308862 No.22308862 [Reply] [Original]

the final black pill

>> No.22308866

Read Bukharin's Philosophical Arabesques.

>> No.22308880

>>22308862
>everything coincidentally acts as if the external world is real, but also it’s all me even though I can’t control any of it
There is no benefit to being a solipsist. It doesn’t even make sense without injecting non-solipsist understanding of the world. Continue to doubt everything, be an absolute skeptic, believe that nothing can ever be “justified.” See how that works out for you.

>> No.22308902

>>22308862
>Taking solipsims seriously
>Publishes book

>> No.22308926

>>22308880
But indeed nothing can be rationally justified. If we acted only upon justification we would never act.

>> No.22308941

>>22308926
>I believe with reason that jumping off a bridge will hurt me
>I don’t want to be hurt
>I don’t jump off a bridge
Is that not a justified course of action?

>> No.22308961

>>22308926
Correct. Good thing we don’t operate purely on “reason” and we have emotions

>> No.22308987

>>22308941
Why you don't want to be hurt?

>>22308961
Yes, I'd say instincts, more precisely, but also in a higher degree belief, faith.

>> No.22309258

>>22308987
Why I don’t want to be hurt is of no concern for justifying my course of action. As a conscious, reflective being, I operated with the view that I didn’t want to be hurt and this conscious reflection on my desire led to a rational action.

>> No.22309294

>>22309258
Did you draw a syllogism before the idea of touching fire, of jumping off the balcony? Do you rationalize your decision of not touching fire, not drinking bleach, not crossing the road without looking every time you cross a road, see fire next to you, see a bottle of bleach?

>> No.22309624

>>22309294
Yes faggot. that’s what a little thing called “being conscious” is. Read Hegel.

>> No.22309686

>>22309624
No, you never thought for a single second before avoiding those things. You already had the knowledge without even conceiving the idea of that knowledge in discursive, conscious form.

>> No.22309689

>>22308862
black pill doesn't exist

>> No.22309704

>>22308880
Worked for David Hume

>> No.22309738

>>22309624
Show me the principles and their logical ground that made you avoid doing those dangerous and harmful things. You wouldn’t neglect so easily rational principles that, besides being rational, save your life everytime you see fire, is in a building, etc., would you?

>>22309704
Hume’s solution is literally going against such skeptical pyrrhonism.

>> No.22310211

I wouldn't be caught dead reading that.

>> No.22310218

reality is mind dependant.

I'm sorry but I cant prove anything exists to the same level of certainty that my own mind does.

Everything outside of my direct line of sight is a PSYOP.

>> No.22310415

>>22309738
True but he begins by going through the same motions. Just like Descartes did.

>> No.22310534

>>22308862
I know Solipsism isn't it because some of you anons filter me way too hard in the way you speak, and I'm too brainlet to have produced these answers. Checkmate.

>> No.22310558

>>22308862
Solipsism may be true but it behooves us to act as if it isn't and I can't help but think that things that make us better at living in reality, like acting as if solipsism isn't true, has a basis on some ontological reality that we can at least somewhat grasp. That being said try proving it. I am down with solipsism if what is meant by "known to exist" is synonymous with "demonstrable by formalism." Some things we know without being able to articulate it in speech or demonstrate without leading someone, via initiation, to an experience that we could not reproduce through some art.