/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15063145
> idealists/believers/philosophers
All btfo by Feynman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8aWBcPVPMo

>>15063169
Every time I hear a scientist try to discredit philosophy I end up losing respect for scientists.

>>15063169
Retroactively refuted by Gödel.

>>15063546
>meaningless wordbabble
Yeah, I'm thinking mr. godel clowned himself

>>15063557
Brainlet take.

>>15063493
>scientist try to discredit philosophy I
Just a fool saws the branch on which he sits.

>>15063851
God isn't real
X=Y+Z
See, I can do it too!!

>>15063857
>brainlet cope
k.

>>15063145
>Jew
>Jew
>Pedo
>Jew
What did quantum mechanics mean by that?

1. Immaterial things are by definition outside of the scope of science.
2. Philosophy is just as useless when it comes to these things.

This whole bait thread is based on a retarded premise and you're all midwitted pseuds.

>>15063870
>What did quantum mechanics mean by that?
That all the world is jews and pedos and you are a nazi kid in it.

>>15063870
Kek

Schrödinger, who died in 1961, later admitted to impregnating the girl when she was 17 and he was in his mid-forties. Horrifyingly, she then had a botched abortion that left her permanently sterile, according to the newspaper.

Perhaps most diabolically, the physicist kept a record of his abuse in his diaries, even justifying his actions by claiming he had a right to the girls due to his genius.

Walter Moore, author of the biography "Schrödinger, Life and Thought" published in 1989, said that the physicist's attitudes towards women "was essentially that of a male supremacist." Disgustingly, the biography seemed to downplay and even romanticize his abusive habits, and describes him as having a "Lolita complex."

Schrödinger also attempted a relationship with a different 12-year-old girl, disgustingly writing in his journal that she was "among the unrequited loves of his life." However, he decided not to pursue her after a family member voiced their concerns that the physicist was a, you know, unrepentant abusive predator.

>>15063145
You're a monumental retard and anyone who bothers to "discuss" anything with you is one as well. Materialism is a mental illness.

>>15063881
In this case that's what they are though.

>>15063889
Brutal redpill.

>>15063886
I'm not staunch materialist, just interested how it turned out that way.

>>15063903
I didn't say you're a staunch materialist. I said you're a monumental retard and probably mentally unstable. You seem to have forgotten what your thread was about mid-sentence and reverted to some nonsense about "paranormal/suparnatural/magic".

>>15063861
>no argument
k.

>>15063907
>reverted to some nonsense about "paranormal/suparnatural/magic".
I thought this things are implied by idealistic worldview?

>>15063913
Then you have no idea what you're talking about.

>>15063918
Care to explain? I has readen some Plato and was interested in state of modern philosophy.

>>15063921
The core idea of idealism is that the true nature of reality is mental. It's a metaphysical position that doesn't make any testable predictions, just like materialism.

>>15063925
>the true nature of reality is mental.
Thus interactions of objects aren't dictated by purely material relationships (opossed to what modern science says), thus magic is real.

>>15063880
Best post itt.

>>15063931
You seem to be arguing with the voices in your head about an imaginary version of idealism you invented. I answered your question. If you didn't understand what I said, that's your problem. I don't care to engage with mouth-breathing mongoloids.

>>15063880
Immaterial things are by definition outside of the scope of science.
Lmao no.

>>15063933
>updooting your own low IQ post
Desperation.

>>15063931
nonsequitur

>>15063145
>philosophers
Who cares what philosophers say? They aren't concerned with reality anymore. Just nonsense ramblings from ignorence filled with unsound assumptions and assertions.

>>15063949
GPT post.

>>15063950
>philosophers btfo by GPT
Another win for science!

>>15063956
Take your meds.

>>15063885
I fail to see what he did wrong.

>>15063960
She was a heckin' 17 years old child. The brain of a woman doesn't fully develop until she's 35 and done riding the cock carousel, goylem. Fertile pussy for me but not for thee.

>>15063546
>Necessary existence is a positive property
Kant already refuted this long ago, existence is a state of being, not a quality

>existence is a state of being, not a quality

>>15063969
>The ontological proof (or at least the version that Kant criticized) is related to the idea that God exists by necessity, that existence is an essential property of God. When Kant asserted that "existence is not a real predicate", what he meant was that existence cannot be an essential property of anything (that it was an inherently accidental property), and therefore cannot be an essential property of God.

>Kant asserted

>>15063975
wojackposting is not a valid argument you know

>>15063546
I disagree with A4, A5.

>>15063979
Neither is "Kant said", but that's kind of a moot point since I wholly reject the golem chastity cage known as the Western debate tradition.

>>15063985
>Girdle said...
>Well Cunt said...
>Noo you can't do that

>>15063992
You seem to have some problem with Mr. Gurdle's premise, but you are unable to explain it beyond "Kant said no".

Modern western philosophy and debate is quoting books in tandem until one side has no more quotes from books left so he loses.
If you tell people that quoting Jorbehorben isnt an argument or point of debate they look at you like you said 1+1 is 3.
Its like a trading card game, which is why aspies love it.

>>15063999
You seem to agree with Mr. Godel's premises, but you are unable to explain why beyond "I like the conclusion".

>>15064004
>you are unable to explain why
It seems like a perfectly sound axiom to me. I don't care about the conclusion one way or another. Still waiting for you to explain your retarded position.

>>15064007
I'm not that guy, I'm just pointing out that if you can appeal to muh girdle, then he can appeal to muh cunt.

>>15064018
>if you can appeal to muh girdle
Take your meds. No one was appealing to muh girdle. The anon posted a logical argument. It doesn't matter who it originates with.

>>15064022
And the other anon posted a known disagreement with the axioms of that logical argument. It doesn't matter who it originates from.

>>15064029
Once again, "Kant said no" is not an argument and doesn't refute anything, so the argument still stands. Kill yourself, mouth-breathing, dysgenic retard.

>>15064030
Neither Godel's belief that God must exist. What necessity there is for God to exist? Or are you one of those retards that seek to justify in a perfect creator (aka god) what we can't yet scientifically explain?

>>15063546
A2 and A4 are cyclical reasoning?
There's no reason to believe D1, A3, T2 or A5.

>>15064036
>Neither Godel's belief that God must exist
LOL. You are legit mentally ill.

>>15064038
A literal bot post.

>>15064039
>>15064041
Nice non arguments you got there

>>15064043
See >>15064039. You respond like a broken bot. It's hard to believe you are sentient. A basic Markov chain can write more coherent responses.

>>15064046
Still awaiting your argument, fore you've provided none.

>>15064046
You're so formulaic that bots show more sentience than you.

>>15064049
What am I supposed to argue against? You seem to have lost the plot completely.

>>15064051
See >>15064046
The presence of nonhumans like you makes any thread formulaic and boring and that's probably what your programmers intended. You are designed to stifle discussion.

>>15064053
See >>15064051
The presence of nonhumans like you makes any thread formulaic and boring and that's probably what your programmers intended. You are designed to stifle discussion.

>>15064057
Ok bot. Call me back when you have some concrete objections against Gödel's proof.

>>15064058
Ok bot. Call me back when you have some concrete objections against Kant's refutation.

>>15064067
What's Kant's refutation? "Kant said no" is not a refutation. Take your meds.

>>15064071
What's Godel's proof? "Godel said so" is not a proof. Take your meds.

>>15064074
>What's Godel's proof?
Laid out in anon's pic: >>15063546. Once again, you are either a bot or deranged. There's no other explanation for your moronic posts.

>>15064076
What's Kant's refutation?
Laid out in anon's post: >>15063972. Once again, you are either a bot or deranged. There's no other explanation for your moronic posts.

>>15064083
>ummm kant said no
Okay. You're clearly mentally ill and this is boring.

>>15064085
>thread 'main' panicked at 'execute_to_panic', main.rs:3
stack backtrace:
0: std::sys::imp::backtrace::tracing::imp::unwind_backtrace
1: std::panicking::default_hook::{{closure}}
2: std::panicking::default_hook
3: std::panicking::rust_panic_with_hook
4: std::panicking::begin_panic
5: futures::task_impl::with
6: futures::task_impl::park
...

>>15064086
>the mentally ill tranny uses rust
Pottery. Figures someone who thinks his fee-fees determine his biological sex is also someone who can't tell the difference between a detailed logical proof and "Kant asserted".

>>15064094
You're embarassing dude.

>>15064098
Take your meds, troon.

>>15064099
My meds don't work if you don't take them as well.

>>15064107
>the tranny is also a jabber
The plot thickens.

>>15064107
>>15064120
fucking lmao

>>15064120
As I said, embarassing. So this is the level of the average disingenuous christcuck. You will never be a real logician.

>>15064126
>the deranged tranny starts to hallucinate christcuck boogeymen

>>15063145
>paranormal/suparnatural/magic is real
>the world is Ideal rather than Material in it's core - why modern mainstream science hasn't found and recognized it yet.
because you cannot really quantify a paranormal or supernatural event? only know something spooky happened but that's it.
While you can quantify and do repeated experiments on something that is material.
Also you have to remember that old chemistry or alchemy was for the longest time chemistry + mysticism.

>>15064129
>the deranged christcuck keeps hallucinating tranny boogeyman

>>15064132
>m-m-muh christcucks
>y-y-you're christian b-b-because the voices said so
Literally mentally ill.

>>15064138
>m-m-muh trannies
>y-y-you're transexual b-b-because the voices said so
Literally mentally ill.

>>15064139
I think I'll just let you seethe and lose your mind at this point.

>>15064139
>i-i-i'm arent transexual b-b-because the voices said so
Meds, now.

>>15064145
>i-i-i'm arent christian b-b-because the voices said so
Meds, now.

>the troon is arguing with itself now
Mental illness keeps intensifying.

>the christcuck is pretending to be multiple persons now
Mental illness keeps intensifying.

>>15063935
You don't understand.

>>15063885
>describes him as having a "Lolita complex."
lmao schrödinger was a lolicon

>>15064218
To say that the nature of reality is mental is not to say that the nature of reality is decided by the arbitrary brainfarts of an upright monkey. You are confusing idealism with the materialist approach. lol

>>15064297
>the nature of reality is mental
why science haven't found it out yet?

>>15064348
Science doesn't deal with metaphysics. You're a legit retard. It inherently makes no difference to science whether the world is mental or """material""".

>>15064350
If the world is mental why it acts as material according to science?

>>15064353
>why it acts as material
What does "acting as material" mean, retarded drone?

>>15064354
It means that properties and interactions of every ojbects that this world consists of are determined by their material structure and organization of lessers material parts they are consist of.

>>15064361
>determined by their material structure
What makes a structure "material", retarded drone?

>>15064363
In material structure it's properties are determined by organization of little things it consists of, as opossed to idealistic structure being a compilation of idealistic concepts, such as certain volume, durability, shape, colour.

>>15064369
>it's properties are determined by organization of little things it consists of
That's just "structure". What's "material" about it, retarded drone?

>>15064370
You don't understand.

>>15064374
So you can't explain why reality having a structure implies it is """material""", or even explain what you mean by something being """material""" beyond it being structured? That's for demonstrating your typical lack of sentience.

>>15063145
all philosophers are morons, I realized this when I began to read what they actually wrote, the only one which wasn't lobotomized was nietzesche

>>15064379
>the only one which wasn't lobotomized was nietzesche
Lol, lmao even

>>15063885
>Horrifyingly
>>15063885
>according to the newspaper.
>>15063885
>Perhaps most diabolically
>>15063885
>abuse
>>15063885
>male
>>15063885
>supremacist
>>15063885
>Disgustingly
>>15063885
>abusive
>>15063885
>disgustingly
>>15063885
>unrepentant
>>15063885
>abusive
>>15063885
>predator.

>>15064379
Is it a single bot posting dozens of nearly identical replies in every thread that contains the word "philosophy" or are the nonhuman hordes all getting their anti-sentience, anti-reflection rhetorical programming from the same source?

>>15064390
Yes, (You).

>>15064377
Look, imagine 2 structures, one is material and the other one is ideal.
In the material structure it's properties would be fully determined by little particles it consists of, and every interaction of such structures with each other would depent on this little things. This structure doesen't have anything of it's own, it's basicaly an illusion.

The ideal strucrue, hovewer, consists of ideal concepts, such as certain shape, colour, purpose, etc, forming something unique. it can include in itself idea of severability, but it's final properties and itneraction with other structures aren't determined by lesser things it consists of. It is not dependent on matter.

>>15064390
what?

>>15064390
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eSdDb9gLkQ

>>15064388
shoo shoo predator!

>>15064394
>it's properties would be fully determined by little [parts] it consists of
That's structure. Why are all structures "material", retarded drone?

>>15064404
>Why are all structures "material",
Because they are actuallized by arrangment of matter. The science is settled, chud.

>>15064408
What makes your so-called "matter" non-mental?

>>15064414
You asking why matter is material? Stop it.

>>15064418
You still haven't explained what it means for something to be "material" as opposed to "mental", retarded label-thinking drone. Physical models don't care what the metaphysical nature of particles is.

>>15064421
>what it means for something to be "material" as opposed to "mental",
Matter exists outside of human mind, it's material.

>>15064421
>Physical models don't care what the metaphysical nature of particles is.
School says everything is composed of matter.

>>15064423
>exists outside of human mind
That's not a definition of "material" and it doesn't explain what characterizes it. Either way, how do you know anything exists independently of minds?

>>15064425
>School says everything is composed of matter.
With a definition of "matter" that doesn't actually exlude idealism. lol

>>15064432
>Either way, how do you know anything exists independently of minds?
Something has to be there to stimulates the senses.
>the senses are an illusion of the mind
What causes the illusion?

>>15064432
>Either way, how do you know anything exists independently of minds?
Human can die in his sleep by underground gas leakage without noticing it.

>>15064439
>Something has to be there to stimulates the senses.
Why does that something have to be anything other than mental in nature? lol. Talking to mongoloidal nonsentients like you is extremely tedious. You keep making the same error over and over again.

>>15064448
Yeah I predicted you'd respond like that.
So what causes the illusion?

>>15064444
Why shouldn't humans be able to die in their if idealists are right, retarded drone?

>>15064450
>So what causes the illusion?
What illusion? None of my posts say anything about any illusions. Are the voices in your head back again?

>>15064452
Because the nerve gas hasn't existed in his mind while he sleeped, it happened in the material world and without any mental part.

>>15064453
I don't know, you keep using the word mental, so I assumed that you're just that.

>>15064459
>nerve gas hasn't existed in his mind
So what?

>>15064461
So it wasn't mental.

>>15064460
>you keep using the word mental
So what?

>I assumed
You keep making retarded assumptions.

>>15064462
Why not? You seem genuinely retarded. Why don't you "people" stick to subjects you have at least a marginal understanding of, like whatever garbage Kurzgesagt posted this week?

>>15064468
>Why not?
Because it hasn't existed in anyone's mind in the moment of it's action!

>>15064470
>it hasn't existed in anyone's mind
How do you know?

>>15064474
Human was asleep, he can't perceive it.

>>15064475
>he can't perceive it.
>he can't
So?

>>15064483
It can't appear in his mind if he can't perceive it in moment of it's action.

>>15064488
>It can't appear in his mind
So what? You're a genuine moron. Some mind must have perceived it, otherwise it's a Russell's teapot kind of scenario.

>>15063968
You're a fucking moron, nowhere in his proof does he assume that.

>>15064490
>Some mind must have perceived it,
Only AFTER the event of death has happened, However in the moment when event actually takes place no one perceives it.

>>15064497
>Only AFTER the event of death has happened
So what? Any "reality" you ascribe this event beyond its perceived consequences is a purely hypothetical irrelevancy.

>>15064500
Objects interact when no one is watching. The science is setled.

The paranormal is what we need to study to advance technologically. It's how we pass the current standstill where apparently we've almost discovered it all. There's so much more...

... May as well commit OP

>>15064506
>Objects interact when no one is watching
In your fantasies.

>>15064514
It's science. No physical reaction has an observer in it's equation.

>>15063169
No philosopher has been able to debunk Feynman's proof of the uselessness of philosophers lmao

>>15064524
>It's science
No, it isn't. Science doesn't care at all about your purely mental hypotheticals.

>>15064514
I know it's hard to distinguish reality from your psychosis, but the material world is not a figment of your imagination.

>>15064528
I don't know what your mentally ill spergout is about but my point still stands: no one knows about anything happening the consequences of which are never perceived by any mind.

>>15064528
>>15064527
The material world is NOT REAL ok? It's JUST not PLEASE STOP SAYING IT"S REAL.
PLEASE

>>15064531
See >>15064530, take your meds and call me back when you can explain what makes something "material". Your violent spergouts don't look good.

>>15064535
Shut up retard

>>15064537
That was not very nice.

>>15064527
>Science doesn't care at all about your purely mental hypotheticals.
Science doesen't care about need for observer because there is no such need for things to actually happen.

>>15064537
I know mentally ill retards like you typically subscribe to technocrat cult ideas like Simulation Theory, so maybe this illustration will help your tiny mind process what I'm saying: you know you can easily simulate the laws of physics without ever computing anything the consequences of which aren't being currently observed, right? For any measurement from inside the simulation, the world would appear to work the way your naive realistic schoolboy thinks real life works. What "really" happens when no one is looking is metaphytsics. It's not science.

>>15064543
See >>15064546 and kill yourself. You're a tedious drone arguing his retard-tier 19th century metaphysics against some "idealist" voices in his head and this is boring.

@15064546
You are legit mentally ill.

>>15064546
>What "really" happens when no one is looking is metaphytsics. It's not science.
>magic happen when me not lookin
Take your fucking meds?!

>>15064546
Meds.

>>15064553
>>15064555
>>15064556
>dones seething and losing their minds
Neat. The argument in >>15064546 stands completely unchallenged.

The real world is not real because I never left my mom's basement
The earth is not round because i've not seen the round earth
Evolution didn't happen because i didn't see the monkey evolve into man

>>15064562
>The real world is not real because I never left my mom's basement
Based.

>>15064562
Seethe harder and keep losing your mind. My argument still stands unchallenged. :^)

>>15064565
Yeah, no one wants to "challenge" a mentally ill person

this thread is a shit show and you are all pseuds

>>15064573
>you're mentally ill for objectively disproving my mongoloidal "argument"
Whatever helps you cope, drone, but >>15064546 still demonstrates that physics is completely agnostic about whether or not something happens when no one is looking. Any beliefs you have about it don't stem from physical observations.

>>15064575
i will rape you and i will undress you

>>15064546
So we live in a simulation?

>>15064579
I dont have on any pants rn

>>15064577
>hear gunshot
>a man was shot
>you're the only witness
>the shooter was a nigger (no consciousness)
>you end up in jail because the man wouldn't have died otherwise (he was asleep)

>>15064577
https://www.healthline.com/health/mental-health-resources

>>15064586
you think your jew books can give you insight into a genius mind like mine? my mere existence causes non-aryan races to seethe uncontrollably

>>15064583
I don't think so, but I'm not surprised that a nonsentient mongoloid like you can't comprehend a hypothetical meant to illustrate a possibility you're too dumb to consider on its own.

>>15064585
>you end up in jail because the man wouldn't have died otherwise (he was asleep)
Based Philosopher King.

>>15064594
What you described doesen't makes sense if it's not a simulation.

>>15064586
>nooooooo you can't just call out my retarded 19th century metaphysical dogma
>t-t-t-take your m-m-meds
LOL. Seethe.

>>15064602
>i can't understand the logical implications of a hypothetical scenario because it's hypothetical
>i-i-it just makes no heckin' sense
That's because you're a bot, but the point still stands that physics is agnostic about what happens when no one is looking. You can come up with an endless number of different metaphysics that support the same physical laws and look empirically the same to upright monkey science. I just gave you an example (in terms of computer simulations) that should be comprehensible to a pop-sci consuming midwit like you.

>>15064630
I'll say it in a language you can understand.
>but what IF a man could give birth? what IF I were a woman trapped in a man's body?
>that makes no sense.
>y-y-you're just a nonsentient fucking chud!!

>>15064636
No idea what your mentally ill spergout is about, but I've demonstrated objectively that the laws of physics don't care whether or not things happen when no one is looking.

>>15064644
Do you project onto others what you hear people call you all the time? You're only imitating the appearence of someone who knows what he's talking about.

>>15064649
>You're only imitating the appearence of someone who knows what he's talking about.
Then you should be able to explain how empirical measurements from inside a simulation would tell apart whether or not something happens when no one is looking.

>>15064657
Why would you ask me? I'm an automated response from within the simulation to mislead the subjects that know too much.
No one will ever believe you.

>>15064670
>the mentally ill sperg keeps arguing with the voices in his head
I accept your full concession. The laws of physics demonstrably don't imply what you want them to.

>>15064674
All voices are voices in my head according to your theory.

>>15064677
I didn't propose any theories at any point. Literally take your meds.

>>15064680
Wasn't your theory that you were mental? You gave ample evidence for it too.

>>15063145
Hey clown! Show me some moves, entertain me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPhVOZiPokA&ab_channel=NatGeoWILD

>>15064686
>Wasn't your theory that you were mental?
No. I guess you were too caught up in your retarded metaphysical holy war against the "idealist" voices in your head to realize the only thing I've been doing is undermining your non-sci dogma by showing you that physics can't tell apart between idealism and materialism.

>>15064690
You definitely managed to prove that you're mental though.

>>15064691
By BTFOing you into a loop of weak insults? Neat. My argument is objectively correct. You will deflect again.

They were mainly speaking toward logical positivism. They absolutely were not talking about the mindless babble that plagues philosophy. This is obvious since a lot of physicists today despise philosophy.

>>15064704
They were rejecting materialist metaphysics and it makes OP seethe.

>>15064730
>>>/pol/408919355
>it was a christcuck after all

>>15064795
Meds.

bump

>>15064526
Yeah imagine studying knowledge and rationality lol. Imagine studying how to live a good life. Lame! Back to my truly useful and relevant studying of intuitionistic harmonic analysis!

>>15064038
>he doesnt know what the D and A stand for

>>15064704
No they werent.

>>15065311
A stands for Autistic and D stands for Delusional. Fuck off christcuck chud. Girdle was a retard and so are you. Materialism deniers need to take their fucking meds and learn some science.

>>15064146
Holy cope.

>>15065121
>>15065304
>>15065306
>>15065311
>>15065313
>>15065320
>>15065322
samefag

>>15065342
How do you know?

>>15065306
Come back when you can prove that your food is real.

>>15065342
Undermedicated.

Imagine being trapped in a false dichotomy for 3 millennia.

>>15063145
Philosophy is literally the parent and guide of all arts - including the sciences. I don't understand anyone who could possibly think otherwise.
>>15063856
Exactly this.

>>15063911
He literally posted Godel's argument, copetard.

>>15064379
You realized nothing, least of all, that you are wholly unqualified to asses the intelligence of the great thinkers of the past, being so far subordinated to their powers as to seem nearly a different creature.

>>15063169
Philosophical questions, like abstract mathematics, often seem pointless or "dopey," until, at some point in the future of our pursuits of knowledge its relevance becomes apparent, or the tangential relationship of the question to valuable information becomes discernable. This has happened many times in our history already. Fractal mathematics is an obvious example. The trap men like Feynman fall into is an obvious one - he enjoys being iconoclastic, and his love of the love of the crowd undermines rational thinking.

"Do not sit in the seat of a scoffer; he will not go to the wise."

I can confirm from direct observation on multiple occasions that we do in fact live in a dream world, built upon consciousness first and foremost

materialism is a mental illness at the center of western civilization

>>15064283
The English words for Shotacon and Lolicon are "pedophile."

>>15065771
>Fractal mathematics
You are a retard who has no idea what he's talking about lmao. Probably a schizo too

>>15065779
>I can confirm from direct observation on multiple occasions
What's your observations, anon?

>>15065865

>>15063145
The only difference between science and magic is that science is understood.

this board should just be called /psy/ with all this philosophy cuckery
He's not shitting on the philosophers of old, he's shitting on the idea of a philosopher past about 1600 or so.
If you seriously are going for a philosophy degree in current year you're not a philosopher, you're a McDonalds manager in the making

>>15065961
Sorry, you know nothing about modern philosophy.

>>15063169
>Feynman
More like fine man at sucking cocking

>>15065965
>Sorry, you know nothing about modern philosophy.
I know quite a bit about mathematics, though I could always know more.

>>15063145
Consciousness is the prima materia.
- Elemental Elementalism 1.1.

>>15065813
I do, actually. You should try spending some time on the history of mathematics once in a while.

>>15065771
High IQ post.

>>15063145
Idealists forget the material world needed to enact their ideals. The materialists forget that humans require more than just base needs and labor.

>>15066357
>Idealists forget the material world needed to enact their ideals.
Why is this place crawling with functionally illiterate highschool dropouts?

>>15064363
Just google "idealism vs materialism".

>>15066366
Why you have to insult everyone?

>>15066381
He's used to be treated this way, so he lashes out at everyone.

>>15066374
>just google
Thanks for confirming that you can't answer the question.

>>15066381
>Why you have to insult everyone?
I don't insult "everyone". I insult the mouth breathers who clearly have no inkling of a clue what they're talking about but still feel compelled to shit out their pseud takes. I don't know, I guess my tolerance for your sort has gone down a lot over the years.

>>15063145
That's not really the difference. There are basically two differences
Idealists think reality is mental while materialist think reality is not.
Or a better division: materialists think reality is basically a "bottom up" structure where small fundamental things called simples (or atoms) combine together into various patterns and structures. Idealists think reality is a "top down" structure where everything is one thing, and the differences between objects isn't real, the reality divides down into subslices.

Of the two the top down idea is the one that's supported by current science.

>>15066456
>Of the two the top down idea is the one that's supported by current science.
How idealists cope with that?

>>15066456
>let me tell you about the imaginary version of idealism I just pulled out of my asshole
Meds.

>>15066464
They don't need to cope with anything. You're listening to that one retard who keeps spamming his delusion over and over ITT.

>>15066464
What?
>>15066469
That's not imaginary

>>15066473
That was my first post ITT. Wtf are you talking about

>>15066475
It is imaginary. Idealism is fully compatible with anything physics can ever come up with by definition. Materialism is a failed 19th century metaphysics that died with the advent of modern physics.

>>15065771
it's very useful and intuitive to ask the why and how of things you apparently already 'know' though. i understand being wary when philosophy gets incestuous or you can't understand where it's coming from (different topics for example if you don't understand religion), but it has immediate utility for the sciences and anyone trying to discredit it is not just intellectually suspect but a danger to good thinking and progress in their own damn field.

>>15063885
>justifying his actions by claiming he had a right to the girls due to his genius.
yes, he had the right to have a harem of 12yo

>>15066507
>a harem of 12yo
I bet you want to be one of this 12yo.

>>15066518
>I bet you want to be one of this 12yo
that will be a blessing, but i am a man, he probably won't want me

>>15063880
came here to post this.
imagine having less than 120 IQ and thinking that you can define the immaterial with material proofs.

lol
lmao, even.

>>15063546
>D1 A God-like being possess all positive properties
Something that has all properties would be the universal set, which can't exist due to Russell's paradox. QED

>Something that has all properties would be the universal set

>>15063145
The confirmation is everywhere, materialists participate in the mental conscious universe as we all do and cling to its lowest state of vibration, observable matter. The fundamental reality is mental. There are many paths to seeing it, but most cannot, only if you are willing to see it and set yourself to learning can you only begin to see glimpses of it everywhere.

Sacred geometry (once you see it it shows up everywhere, one example is the star of David, Metatron's cube, the Pyramids etc), various philosophies of idealism, Platonism, numerology observed within the measure of physical realm (once you see it, numbers start becoming non-random and show up everywhere you look), deep mental meditation (both independently and hidden within some ancient traditions and practices around the world), psychedelics users (often unknowingly arrive at the same conclusion), alchemy (ie mental transmutation), Gospel of Thomas, Vedic traditions etc, Kabbalah, Thoth, Hermes Trismegistus, quantum physics (non-locality, observer effect etc), cymatics/study of vibration, altered states of consciousness/inherent being/nature of consciousness that still eludes modern science, enlightened masters/beings of higher consciousness (also related to UFO phenomenon), various western and eastern esotericism topics, study of ourselves (psychology, studies of DNA, the human mind rather than just the brain etc).

>>15066704
There's no need to post a selfie, anon. Does this make it easier for you to understand?

>a set is a group of mathematical objects
>a property is a mathematical object
>a god-like being possessing all positive properties would be equivalent to a set containing all positive properties
>a set containing all positive properties is the universal set

>>15066775
We could discuss the multiple levels of your mental retardation, but there's no need to, since you're functionally illiterate and think "all positive properties" means "all properties".

>>15066778
>a property or its negation is positive
This means the set containing all properties would contain all properties or their negations (which are properties themselves). The set containing all positive properties therefore would have the positive property of containing itself which leads to the whole contradiction.

>>15066803
At this point just take your meds.

>>15066804
Gödel's the one who should have taken his antipsychotic mediation.

>>15066807
For now, you're the one vomiting plain schizo word salad. Overt mental illness should be grounds for a ban.

>>15066808
>basic mathematical facts about the universal set is now schizo word salad

>>15066813
Your psychotic illness is not a "mathematical fact". Come back when you're able to tell the difference between "all positive properties" and "all properties".

>>15066815
Explain how "containing itself" is not a positive property first.

>>15066823
Explain how it is, but only after you take your meds and are done explaining why "all positive properties" means "all properties" and why you're even talking about sets in the first place. Your level of delusion is staggering. lol

>>15063870
Heisenberg not a jew.

>>15066830
Whether it has the property of "containing everything that contains itself" or its negation in "containing everything doesn't contain itself" (remember that one of them has to be positive), it leads to the paradox either way.

>why you're even talking about sets in the first place
Gödel is a mathematical logician. He did most of his work in set theory. So it makes sense to apply his logic in the context of set theory. Or did you just repost that image from reddit without knowing any of that?

>>15066888
>containing everything that contains itself
>containing everything doesn't contain itself
Why would it have either of these properties, schizobabbler? lol

>Gödel is a mathematical logician therefore God is a set
Deranged.

>>15063546
>famous mathematician said it so it's true
How is this any different to the TRUST THE SCIENCE CHUD basedfags you people like to believe you're so superior to?

>>15064076
>>15064085
>>15064094
>>15064099
>>15064120
>>15064129
>>15064138
>>15064142
>>15064145
>>15064147
>resident schizo

>>15066904
It's not true because he said so. It holds because the logic is demonstrably correct and you can't find a fault with the axioms besides the fact that they make you seethe.

>>15066894
God with how Gödel defined it is literally the set of all positive properties. Is the word set scaring you that much?

>why would it have either of these properties?
>A1 either a property or its negation is positive
Literally using Gödel's own logic, it has to have one of the previously mentioned properties.

>>15066923
>God with how Gödel defined it is literally the set of all positive properties
Nowhere in that proof does he mention sets.

>Literally using Gödel's own logic
Nowhere in that proof does he imply that "containing everything that contains itself" (or its negation) is a positive property. You are severely undermedicated.

>>15066927
A set is just another name for a group of properties. And everything is a group of properties.

>Nowhere in that proof does he imply...
>A1 either a property or its negation is positive
A property is either positive or its not. It's if it's not positive, then it's negation is positive. I'm beginning to think you don't even understand the proof. It's even funnier that you whine about this because Gödel himself doesn't even proof that necessary existence is a positive property. He just axiomatically states it.

>>15066947
>A set is just another name for a group of properties.
You are even more imbecilic than I thought. Let me guess, you literally can't tell the difference between a property being in a set of properties, and an object having that property.

>A property is either positive or its not. It's if it's not positive, then it's negation is positive.
The negation of "containing everything that contains itself" is "not containing everything that contains itself", not "containing everything that doesn't contain itself". You're a legit inbred.

>>15066953
The set of all positive properties would include all the positive properties about itself. This is the trouble you run into when you defined something to have all positive properties.

>not containing everything that contains itself
>not containing all positive properties that contain themselves
So this God-like being doesn't contain all positive properties then, which contradicts the original definition of a God-like being.

>>15066982
You are mentally ill.

>/sci/ is just /x/ lite with the added bonus of narcissists incapable of debate simply resorting to screaming TAKE MEDS NOW back and forth at eachother until someone gets bored and the thread dies
lmao

>>15066992
>>>/r/eddit

>>15066992
Meds. Now.

>>15066992
Somehow /sci/ is all the most toxic parts of /x/, /lit/, and /fit/.
It's impressive, really.

>>15065411
Dualists btfo

>>15066456
Why can't both be true? Why can't they go hand-in-hand depending on the result that's needed?
Mommy why do we have to fight

>>15067615
>Why can't both be true?
Because there would be contradiction.

>>15063925
>The core idea of idealism is that the true nature of reality is mental.
Core idea of idealism is that reality and objects are ideal.

>>15066953
>imbecilic
Dr. Taleb... I kneel

bump

>>15068140
The core of it is what I said it is, and if you disagree, you're a genuine mouth breather who should stick to /b/.

>>15068274
Dude...
"In philosophy, the term idealism identifies and describes metaphysical perspectives which assert that reality is indistinguishable and inseparable from perception and understanding; that reality is a mental construct closely connected to ideas."

>>15068278
>reality is a mental construct closely connected to ideas.
That's exactly what I told you, you fucking retard. Notice how your own quote says what I said rather than what you said.

>>15068281
But in reality they are not connected to ideas, they are connected to matter.

>>15068287
Prove that "matter" isn't mental. You can't. Either way, after demonstrating so plainly that you're functionally illiterate, I'm not sure there's any point to this discussion. Who's gonna take you seriously?

>>15068292
Could you explain how is it possible for matter to be mental, to exist as mental?

>>15068295
>Could you explain how is it possible for matter to be mental
Why wouldn't it be possible? I honestly don't know why you people struggle with it. I understand disregarding it as unfalsifiable metaphysics, which it obviously is, but it weirds me out how much redditors get hung up on trying to "scientifically disprove" something that makes no empirical difference one way or the other.

>>15068300
>Why wouldn't it be possible? I honestly
I honestly don't understand how it could be possible. How can matter be immaterial?

>>15068304
Your "material"/"immaterial" distinction is a meaningless anachronism. Maybe if you weren't so hung up on labels, and contemplated what "matter" is according to the models of modern physics (which you take at face value), you'd see that you are ironically a lot closer to the idealist mindset than I am.

>>15068311
Fine, could you then explain what's the difference between materialism and idealism as you see it?

>>15068320
>then explain what's the difference between materialism
I would, but I'm not sure what your understanding of materialism is. Most people here conflate it with physicalism. Look at the quotes on the left of OP's pic and reflect on them for a bit. The fathers of modern physics had trouble reconciling their findings with the concreteness and tangibility of materialism as it was understood back then, so much so that materialism as such fell out of favor and was replaced by physicalism. Physicalism made room for "physical" things that can't be thought of as concrete or tangible or even determinate, but no account of it defines what the essence of a "physical" thing is, so realistically speaking, you're asking me to explain the difference between idealism and your vague feefees.

>>15068366
Ok, i understand what you mean now. Thanks for effort, will discuss it with my friend taught if philosophy.

>>15063870
ahh yes well known jew Werner Heisenburg, who (as part of his zionist plan) was hired by the Nazi's to complete the atom bomb.

>>15068649
Wait until you hear who funded Hitler's rise to power and then both Nazi and Soviet industry.

>>15068649
>>15068651
samefag

>>15068654
Kike bot.

>>15068649
He's not a jew.

>>15063880
> Immaterial things are by definition outside of the scope of science.

That doesn't stop theories from being created.
Just because you cant study something or observe it as "material" doesn't mean it is not there. IE: consciousness.

>>15066992
I explained it all detail countless times, /x/ had a much easier time understanding it all when I taught it to them. /sci/ are just egotistical psueds who cant even understand simple logic most times so I dont even bother trying to have an adult conversation here. Treating people with the mind of a child like an adult never works out well

>>15066713

>>15068670
Consciousness is completely material. It's just your brain doing what it does.

>>15068649
Ok, swap him out with his colleague Max Born (Jew).

>>15068802
>Consciousness is completely material.

>>15068802
this some stone cold nig shit here

>>15068823
I don't know why everybody focuses on 20th century physics like it means something more than 19th or 18th century physics. All the great discoveries from Newton to Maxwell outshine any Jewish accomplishment (they accomplished a lot still). We shouldn't forget about the great 20th century physicist that weren't Jewish (like that means something). Planck, Dirac, Schrodinger, Hilbert (depending on who you think discovered general relativity first) T'hooft, Fermi ect.

>>15064145
>the size of that ass
OH MY SCIENCE!

>>15068831
Yes.

>>15070766
Keep telling yourself that.

>>15063885
>Schrodinger dated kids
>Albert Einstein married his cousin

Is it alright to say it was a different era?

>>15066713
This is the truth I am too scared to believe

>>15071218
No need, it's obvious.

>>15071692
The degree to which it's "obvious" to you is inversely proportional to your level of sentience, regardless of whether you happen to be right or not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcPyTgLILqA&ab_channel=EssentiaFoundation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-rXm7Uk9Ys

>>15063145
The world as your eyes can see is a illusion created by the mind. Nothing you can see is real (permanent). Everything is like passing clouds.

Science is half a circle, while spirituality is the whole circle. The so called science of today asks the wrong questions and have axioms that are not proper (this is changing). This board is rigged as fuck, so we can't have a serious debate about that here. In fact I believe this whole chan is rigged. Maybe those in charge have some kind of agenda, and they treat us like cattle.

>>15063931
>material relationships
What use does the word "material" serve here? Wait, I will answer for you since you can't articulate your actual subconscious thoughts: it's just a placeholder term that can be filled with your hopes and dreams about the metaphysical foundation of reality "ideally to be determined in the future" (hint: it cannot be). This substance also is supposed to have the capacity to generate unrelated phenomena (qualia etc.) from strong emergence. This is, of course, the definition of magic.

Relations are the only thing that matters. And guess what? Non-materialist views posit these as well. Do you think just because something is mind, that anything is possible? Alright. Please imagine a novel color right now (if you misintepret this question as "tone", then make it "primary color").
You can't. In the space of possible relations human consciousness works in, reaching a novel color qualia is not possible. Do you think that fact is trivial? It is anything but -- because it proves this space does not allow infinite possibility (of operations or values), thus *has* structure to it.

What can be done with such a structure? A lot.


I am not an idealist, but an idealist universe would allow more than enough room for rational rulesets to give the illusion of a physical universe.

>>15072828
>reaching a novel color qualia is not possible
It is, especially with drug use. It's convenient to assume we are so limited for the fact that there are limits to what can be universally conveyed

>>15072813
>we can't have a serious debate about that here
This is not the place for that. Go to >>>/x/