[ 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: 157 KB, 1127x1600, 1355226600564.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3471813 No.3471813[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>If nothing exists, there can be no consciousness: a consciousness with nothing to be conscious of is a contradiction in terms. A consciousness conscious of nothing but itself is a contradiction in terms: before it could identify itself as consciousness, it had to be conscious of something. If that which you claim to perceive does not exist, what you possess is not consciousness.

>> No.3471822
File: 12 KB, 245x300, Frans_Hals_-_Portret_van_René_Descartes.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3471822

Little late to the party, bro.

>> No.3471825

>>3471813
What if it exists but not as it appear to be?

>> No.3471829

>>3471825

That's the case, according to science.

>> No.3471830

i dont think thats a very controversial idea

>> No.3471834

>>3471825
100% irrelevant.

>> No.3471837

Are you trying to say something?

>> No.3471881

>>3471837
I laughed because of this post.

>> No.3473788

I fall in love every tiem ;_;

>> No.3474080

>>3471813
>>If nothing exists, there can be no consciousness: a consciousness with nothing to be conscious of is a contradiction in terms. A consciousness conscious of nothing but itself is a contradiction in terms: before it could identify itself as consciousness, it had to be conscious of something. If that which you claim to perceive does not exist, what you possess is not consciousness.

What?

>> No.3474104

>>3471813

And why can't a consciousness identify itself as consciousness without identifying anything else?

How do you know that it can't identify itself?

>> No.3474134

>>3474104

it can't identify itself without some framework.

>> No.3474136

>>3474134

Why not? Has anyone ever had a consciousness lacking anything else as a framework that didn't self identify?

>> No.3474139

>>3471813
somebody's been reading Kant

>> No.3474140

>>3474136
I can't understand what you are trying to say.

>> No.3474142

>>3474140

How do you know that a consciousness can't identify itself without a framework?

>> No.3474145

tl;dr: one cannot assert nihilism
revolutionary stuff there, ms. rand.

>> No.3474149

>>3474142
Where can a consciousness find information to understand what it is if this information does not exist or is not accessible. We can identify our consciousness only because we have a framework.

>> No.3474155

>>3474149

But what is the bar for identification? Acknowledgement of it's own existence? Knowing the word and definition of consciousness? I mean, have we even fully identified our own consciousness? Are the frameworks around us helping our hindering our efforts?

You still haven't answered my question, how do you know this? Just because it seems to be does not make it true. There are still plenty of questions that can be raised through that piece of the argument being made, and the line I called question to is stated like an assumption.

>> No.3474158

Thus solipsism is wrong.

>> No.3474195

>>3474155

>You still haven't answered my question, how do you know this?

It sounds right.

>But what is the bar for identification? Acknowledgement of it's own existence?


As I said before, information to affirm it's existence could not exist if there was no framework.

>Knowing the word and definition of consciousness?

Knowing it exists as something distinct from other objects.

>> No.3474198

>>3474145

hahaha yep. though it is a breaking moment for undergraduate students to realize this.

>> No.3474203

>>3474195

>As I said before, information to affirm it's existence could not exist if there was no framework.

Why?

>knowing it exists as something distinct from other objects

Ah, that's why. Your proposition then denies the possibility of there being a frame-work-less existence, so in reality, you're not accounting for that question at all besides saying "Just don't think about it".

Is a consciousness still a consciousness without other objects then? How do you know it's not? I keep getting back to this question, of how do you know this, but you keep dodging it, and the only answer is 'it sounds right'.

Dodgy philosophy if you ask me.

>> No.3474215

>>3474203
>>3474203

>why

How do you know you exist?


>Your proposition then denies the possibility of there being a frame-work-less existence

I deny information to affirm it's existence could exist without this framework.


>Is a consciousness still a consciousness without other objects then?

If it is not conscious of other objects, if it can not use objects to see that it is distinct and from this knowledge affirm it's existence, it can not exist as a consciousness.

>> No.3474221

>>3474215

>I deny information to affirm it's existence could exist without this framework.

But you're the one who brought up the problem in the first place. The entire thread is about what a consciousness would be or not be without the frameworks around it. If you're going to define things such that the problem you have created is not a problem at all, then why even start the thread in the first place?

Philosophy ladies and gents, and this is why I study it.

>If it is not conscious of other objects, if it can not use objects to see that it is distinct and from this knowledge affirm it's existence, it can not exist as a consciousness.

This just gets back to my original question and is once again, based on the assumption I have been picking at.

>> No.3474229

>>3474221
>If you're going to define things such that the problem you have created is not a problem at all, then why even start the thread in the first place?

Bro, I am not the OP. There is no "problem". Everything the OP said was perfectly fine.

>>3474104
>And why can't a consciousness identify itself as consciousness without identifying anything else?

I told you why I think so in every post. There isn't much else to say.

>> No.3474236

>>3474229

The OP's post presents a problem, then explains it away by making a set of propositions, including an assumption that a consciousness in a frameworkless reality could not identify itself. I raised issue with this assumption, and you have continued to dodge this question. In return, you have merely defined what it is for a consciousness to identify itself in such a way that the assumption that the OP's post is based upon both does not matter, while bringing in a whole new set of assumptions with which that definition is based upon. I'd say there's a big problem there.

>> No.3474238

Some "truths" are depressing therefore why should I care about "truth"?

>> No.3474258

>>3474236
But consciousness cannot exist without a framework and I have explained why. You are simply not happy with this explanation.

Everything the OP said was logical. You aren't actually critiquing anything here. You are just asking why and how over and over.


Now answer this question:
>>3474203
>>3474215

>As I said before, information to affirm it's existence could not exist if there was no framework.

>Why?

How do you know you exist?

>> No.3474263

>>3474258
Why would you even want to question that? you a nihilist or something?

>> No.3474269

>>3474267
read
>>3474238

>> No.3474267

>>3474263
You know why.

Now answer it.

>> No.3474272

>>3474258
cogito ergo sum

>> No.3474273

>>3474258

>But consciousness cannot exist without a framework

I keep asking why because you haven't given an answer. Your answer so far has been "Consciousness can't exist without a framework because consciousness can't exist without a framework, and I've defined consciousness as something that needs a framework to exist."

How do you know you exist?

I don't, I merely have a framework in which I guess that I exist. However, I am not sure if I truely exist without or without this framework, and, and this is important now, I don't make claims that it is impossible for me to exist without this framework.

>> No.3474282

>>3474273

>Your answer so far has been "Consciousness can't exist without a framework because consciousness can't exist without a framework, and I've defined consciousness as something that needs a framework to exist."

It can't exist without the information it needs to affirm it's existence. This can only be found in a framework!


>However, I am not sure if I truely exist without or without this framework,

You wouldn't be able to ask this question without it.

>> No.3474286

>>3474282

>It can't exist without the information it needs to affirm it's existence. This can only be found in a framework!

And this is based on your definition of consciousness which requires information found in a framework. Congrats, you've discovered definitional false choices.

>You wouldn't be able to ask this question without it.

Now I know you're either an undergrad or just plain trolling

>> No.3474297

>>3474286
>And this is based on your definition of consciousness which requires information found in a framework.

Explain to me how this is possibly wrong.
>Now I know you're either an undergrad or just plain trolling

As above.

>> No.3474298

>>3474139
and taking it out of context too

>> No.3474304

>>3474297

>Explain to me how this is possibly wrong.

Your definition assumes what is necessary for a consciousness to identify itself.

>> No.3474314

>>3474304
I assert this definition based on reason.

>> No.3474325

>>3474314

What reason?

>> No.3474331

>>3474325
Reason inherent within myself which allows me to find logical answers to these questions.

>> No.3474334

>>3474331

I'll just let that phrase stand on it's own and let you think about what you've done. Good evening, sir.

>> No.3474335

>>3474331
fuck science

>> No.3474336

>>3474334
Far better than

>BUT HOW CAN YOU KNOW?
>>3474335
>science
>implying I am not being scientific

>> No.3474339

>>3474336
>implying I am not being scientific

but that's the issue

fuck science
fuck physicalism

>> No.3474340

>>3474238

the truth sets you free

>> No.3474342
File: 192 KB, 350x283, 2716844544_arnold_schwarzenegger_movies_1_answer_6_xlarge.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3474342

>>3474340
>you don't have free will
>b-but the truth sets you free!

wrong answer

>> No.3474345

>>3474339
I have some physicalism for you right here

*whips out dick*

>> No.3474346

>>3474345
*bang*

>> No.3474350

>>3474346
What was that?

>> No.3474354

>>3474350
You need a framework to know what was that.

>> No.3474359

>>3474354
I have one. I do not know what the word bang means in this context.

Now tell me.

>> No.3474363

>>3474359
You sure like to tell people what to do, little bitch. Why don't you come and make me?

>> No.3474366

>>3474363
Why don't you come here, dickbutt?

>> No.3474375

>>3474366
I just did.

>> No.3474389

>>3474375
*puts dick away*

>> No.3474938

>>3471813
How can she be so beautiful? This burns my heart.

>> No.3475740

>>3474363
you think you can fucking come on /lit/ and just act like a fucking hardass and order people around? Bad news for you, fuckface, but tonights the night your luck runs out. You fucking tell ANYBODY on these forums what to do again, and you're going to find out the hard way what a fucking baseball bat to the side of the skull feels like. Think I'm fucking kidding? I have your IP, I know who you are, and Im more than willing to settle this argument face to fucking face. We'll see who's the pleb one when one of us is lying face down in a pile of their own blood, shit, and piss. Try and order someone else on here around, and see what fucking happens to you. I'm normally a calm guy but when I need to, I'm willing to break some fucking face to get my point across, just fucking test me you worthless sack of excrement.

>> No.3475744

I thought the Enlightenment was gay.

>> No.3476181

>>3471813
>If nothing exists, there can be no consciousness

Does anyone have any objections to this one?

>> No.3476191

>>3476181
Any dualist would object to this

>> No.3476215

>>3476181
What's to object to? Consciousness is something and it exists, if nothing exists than there can't be consciousness.

>> No.3476261

>>3476181
NOTHING existing means there is nothing, so obviously there couldn't be consciousness if there is no space for it to be.

>>3476191
Duality doesn't have to be present in everything.

>>3476215
exactly

>> No.3476266

what if you perceive that perception doesn't exist?

>> No.3476271

>>3476266
You can't, that sentence is nonsensical.

>> No.3476288

>>3476266
How could you PERCEIVE something without PERCEPTION?

>> No.3476327

>>3476288
But can perception itself be perceived?

>> No.3476741

>>3471813

im just gonna go ahead and save that pic too bad it aint a jiggly gif

i got nothing else to add

>> No.3476761

>>3476327
Yes, what perception does is basically percieve itself.

>> No.3479371

>>3474342

clearly youre just not capable of grasping the implications, keep watching your tv news by the way.