/sci/ - Science & Math

not science or math

>>15371901

How is discussing spacetime not science or math?

>>15371895
when you're a baby you literally develop an ego as a solution to the problem how to exercise will over representations. the apparent primacy of spacetime and physical matter are biases that stem from the limitations of the egoic solution.

>>15371895
They are words created by humans, which are indeed physical matter in spacetine

Schopenhauer was a retard who denied the reality of atoms. Plus his metaphysical system is basically incomprehensible and he uses mystic language to cover it up.

It's explained by CTMU. Read it if you're IQ is high enough.

>>15371895
idealism is garbage

>>15371901
You just can't handle the slopenhauser

>>15371895
>spacetime and physical matter?

Riddle me this, /sci:
What is time?
What is space?
What is matter (ok, I know what is matter, but what is ENERGY)?

Schopenhauer literally tells you in The World as Will and Idea to start with Kant, and that he bases all of his work on Kant.

Space and Time are functions of the brain, they are part of the representation.

>>15372293
I believe energy is from fluctuations of the underlying quantum field. As to why it fluctuates though I don't know. But if there's a law that states nothing can be created or destroyed then it's assumed that the quantum field has always be fluctuating since the beginning of time, if there is such a thing

>>15372355
>fluctuations of the underlying quantum field.
Isn't quantum a smallest possible portion of ENERGY?

>>15371938

Damn I never conceived it like that. Any recommended reading for that idea?

>>15372975
kind of cliche, but try to get through as much jung as you can
https://press.princeton.edu/series/the-collected-works-of-c-g-jung
i recommend not reading internet articles or short books summarizing his work because they end up ridiculously wrong and oversimplified. he is easily among the most important thinkers of the 20th century but academics tend to hate him for reasons you will come to understand.

>>15374927

Where do I even start with Jung?

>>15375069
first of all, you can find torrents of most, if not all of the official english translated works, which lets you start with whatever looks interesting to you. also there are various well made audiobooks available.
the red book is fairly interesting if you want to have an understanding of the background evolution of his thinking and imagination, though he didn't want to release the book himself.
'psychological types' is good for insight into how personality types actually function, 'psychology and alchemy' helps tremendously in understanding esoteric knowledge, etc, etc. ultimately he wants to tie things down to practical reality so you'll get something out of whatever you work through.

>>15376690

Thanks. It is daunting. I just finished Schopenhauer, and I agree with his description of reality, but I disagree with his conclusions about happiness.

>>15374927

In what writing did Jung talk about the development of the ego as a means for the will to affect representations?

>>15371974
feel free to explain how matter and atoms are the primarily constituents of the real/objective world, during which you must explain how qualia/subjective experience arise from the purely physical

>>15372206
materialism and physicalism are dead ends, dualism is flawed due to the issue of personal identity/how souls interact with the body. monism/idealism is the only sensible option left ;)

>>15379096

>materialism and physicalism are dead ends, dualism is flawed due to the issue of personal identity/how souls interact with the body. monism/idealism is the only sensible option left ;)

I don't understand how anyone disagrees with this at this point.

>>15371974
All modern physicists deny the reality of atoms as they were defined when Schopenhauer was alive. Atoms were defined as indivisible for most of human history, so what we call atoms now are not atoms.

>>15372975
Donald Hoffman’s work follows a similar line of thinking, but he still doesn’t have a scientific theory to back it up. You may want to check out his book The Case Against Reality.

>>15379096
>dualism is flawed due to the issue of personal identity/how souls interact with the body
Quantum mechanics.