/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3807744
>offer the object's rest mass as energy to make virtual particles real.
>the universe would gain a comparable amount of formerly virtual particles
We can clearly see that there is no bi-univocal correspondence between linear signifying links or archi-writing, depending on the author, and this multireferential, multi-dimensional machinic catalysis. The symmetry of scale, the transversality, the pathic non-discursive character of their expansion: all these dimensions remove us from the logic of the excluded middle and reinforce us in our dismissal of the ontological binarism we criticised previously.

Utilitarianism is logical because it is based on self-evident metaphysical phenomena which are just as valid as any scientific fact. I can't prove consciousness in a lab experiment but I am observing the fact I am conscious, scientific method itself requires an observer. How can I observe if I am a philosophical zombie?

There seems to be a lot of people who mistakes cynicisism for realism, presumably because it allows them to dismiss all criticism as coming from people who are afraid of the truth, but whether I feel good or bad about something isn't a reliable method of validation, so... Ozymandias was right to kill millions to save billions and OP is trying too hard to be "shocking" like an angst teen.

>>3626548
No it doesn't, it's fine without any atheist activism.

>they dont want me because I'm not an artfag

>WE DID IT GUIZ, WE'RE BEATING A DEAD HORSE, WE'RE SO SPECIAL AND SUPERIOR
Oh for fuck's sake.

http://www.4chan.org/rules#sci
>No "religion vs. science" threads.

Reporting, I don't care that it's 200 posts long.

>>3482002
So what should I call myself then? How do I express my utter contempt for narcissistic neckbeard atheists?

>>3454110
>>3454112
>I am quibbling over semantics because I don't have a counter-argument.
I use the word "sapience" because "sentience" only covers the ability to feel while I am referring to the ability to think.

>>3304695
>ubermensch

>Is consciousness a cruel joke that makes us think we have free will?
>You just don't understand my nonsensical question because it's too deep for you.

>mensa

>>3135361
Evolution doesn't create anything, the laws of physics and were the same before and after evolution started happening. Evolution doesn't explain consciousness.

Everything you have said has no logic behind it, I think I'm free to speculate on what subjective motivations you have for saying such humiliating things.
>>3135365
I am directly experiencing consciousness, this fact is as absolute as any scientific fact, the only reason you are picking out "consciousness" as opposed to the results of an experiment is because you think it's shocking.

>>3081083
>ur just mad cause im as smart as Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein
lol, you probably have no idea what they were trying to say

You confuse cynicism with realism, you think the most depressing outcome is true simply because you can say "WAKE UP SHEEPLE" and pretend you are superior to everyone else.

You like irony. Yes? Well isn't it ironic that you think humanity is doomed because it is ruled by emotions yet you continually express disgust for "humans" and pride for yourself?

I'm not a failure, I'm superior because I don't care about anything.

MOM CAN YOU GO TO THE STORE AND GET MORE HOT POCKETS, WE RUN OUT

So anyway, I'm a shocking atheist ubermensch and you're just mad cause I shocked you out of your little world.

>Narcissistic personality disorder
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001930/

I'm a shocking atheist satanist nihilist non-conformist anarcho-communist elitist narcissistic genius, you just disagree with me because you're all corporate drones.

Stop laughing at me.

computer science is just the first and foremost technology of the now, it's just superior, you normies wouldn't understand because we're just more intelligent than everyone else, unlike some people

-_-'