Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - eggsalad

Pages: 1 ... 474849 5051 ... 84
1441
two rocks bumping into each other does not equal consciousness
fucking lol, this is exactly what you believe if you think that consciousness and perception and experience ALL derive from the brain, which is a completely physical construct. the brain is literally things bumping into each other, dude.
...

the difference is that one produces consciousness

the other does not

and cannot.

you insane fuck.
If you can't comprehend the difference between observable consciousness and the sensation of experience then you need to brush up on solipsism before even trying to think about this.

1442
Actually I sometimes wonder if it's possible to "exist" as a rock.
Rocks don't have brains, or anything comparable to brains; they are just pieces of compacted sediment. You can't exist as a rock, no.
Rocks are made of the same things humans are, friend. So long as I cannot identify what "part" of me enables me to be here and experience this, I will conclude that such an interface may be more adaptable than that.
I don't know about you, but no, I am definitely not made of sediment or volcanic ash. This isn't about "interfaces", we aren't monitors or touchscreens; our consciousness is the result of the brain. No brain (or equivalent) means no ability to comprehend existence.
A brain is no more than a system of receptors working in assembly as physics sees fit, how is that a fundamentally different process that produces the sensation of experience (note that this is distinct from simply responding to environmental stimuli)? Component A clicks into Component C and causes a reaction, that reaction is what we experience. However, how is that reaction fundamentally different from two rocks hitting each other? Both are just the same atomic particles interacting in ways that physics dictates.

1443
Actually I sometimes wonder if it's possible to "exist" as a rock. Could you have that metaphysical/whatever-explanation interface into such an object such that you could "perceive" its being? Obviously as humans we are, in some ways, just rocks, and our interface is somehow aware of the changes in state within the brain, which themselves can be indicative of changes in state of the body as a whole. So asking what it's like to be fertilizer isn't too far outside my personal scope, but it's not exactly the easiest thing to conceive of/relate to considering. :P
i remember when i talked about this and fear made me feel bad

1444
Serious / Re: SQS: Is consent always necessary?
« on: October 13, 2015, 12:20:23 AM »
This question depends on how we evaluate pain and suffering. Some people view it as inherently bad while others will view it as something that is on a number line, and thus can be cancelled by positives.

From my usual nihilistic perspective there is no objective morality so the concept is null. But considering the concept's usefulness for a functioning society, consent can most certainly be broken. In fact, society is founded on a breaking of consent, considering we are forced into life, forced into maturity, and forced into a life that most certainly entails suffering.

1445
The Flood / Re: If you were able...
« on: October 13, 2015, 12:16:07 AM »
yfw you find out you will die "in the definition of suffering for you, specifically"
So I'm going to die by living? :^)

1446
For those of you that say there's probably nothing, or don't expect anything afterwards.......ask yourself, would everything you've been through ever be justified in this life? Like, would anything ever make it all worth it for you?
Former question: no. I can solidly say that I'd prefer to never have been born. Latter question: well to me I think a lot of sexual satisfaction could hold me distract me from assessing that so yeah.

1447
The Flood / Re: If you were able...
« on: October 13, 2015, 12:12:06 AM »
Damn right I would.
I'm going to die by a stroke when I turn 58?
Shit let's find out how I manage to survive a fall from the Empire State, this shit will make me famous.
You literally know that you will not die from anything other than what you witnessed. You can do fucking anything.
Start raping and pillaging even.
What are the cops going to do?
Shoot you?
You aren't destined to die by gunshot.
Well, you don't die when you go to prison...

Plus that fall could break every single bone in your body, and you still wouldn't be dead
yeah but pain meds are goat

1448
The Flood / Re: If you were able...
« on: October 13, 2015, 12:11:39 AM »
Damn right I would.
I'm going to die by a stroke when I turn 58?
Shit let's find out how I manage to survive a fall from the Empire State, this shit will make me famous.
You literally know that you will not die from anything other than what you witnessed. You can do fucking anything.
Start raping and pillaging even.
What are the cops going to do?
Shoot you?
You aren't destined to die by gunshot.
Having this mentality would likely result in an early death at the hands of the police, or something like that.
b-but the prophecy didnt say police

1449
The Flood / Re: If you were able...
« on: October 13, 2015, 12:11:08 AM »
Damn right I would.
I'm going to die by a stroke when I turn 58?
Shit let's find out how I manage to survive a fall from the Empire State, this shit will make me famous.
You literally know that you will not die from anything other than what you witnessed. You can do fucking anything.
Start raping and pillaging even.
What are the cops going to do?
Shoot you?
You aren't destined to die by gunshot.
Unless you find out that you were flayed to death. That would suck to know.
Inject yourself with heroin before the time of death.
It would eventually wear off, and then you'd be flayed and have a heroin-hangover. It's not like you could overdose and die, either because that's not how you were destined to.
spend years in therapy to develop a flaying fetish

1450
The Flood / Re: If you were able...
« on: October 13, 2015, 12:06:59 AM »
Damn right I would.
I'm going to die by a stroke when I turn 58?
Shit let's find out how I manage to survive a fall from the Empire State, this shit will make me famous.
You literally know that you will not die from anything other than what you witnessed. You can do fucking anything.
Start raping and pillaging even.
What are the cops going to do?
Shoot you?
You aren't destined to die by gunshot.
Unless you find out that you were flayed to death. That would suck to know.
Inject yourself with heroin before the time of death.

1451
The Flood / Re: If the 50 states went to war, which would win?
« on: October 12, 2015, 11:19:02 PM »
Are ICBMs included?
No one wins when nukes are involved.
That meme is so hilarious.

1452
The Flood / Re: If the 50 states went to war, which would win?
« on: October 12, 2015, 11:17:06 PM »
California could quickly seize it's immediately needed resources and operate from there.

1453
The Flood / Re: If you were able...
« on: October 12, 2015, 11:12:41 PM »
Damn right I would.
I'm going to die by a stroke when I turn 58?
Shit let's find out how I manage to survive a fall from the Empire State, this shit will make me famous.
You literally know that you will not die from anything other than what you witnessed. You can do fucking anything.
Start raping and pillaging even.
What are the cops going to do?
Shoot you?
You aren't destined to die by gunshot.

1454
Serious / Re: I don't understand why people were mad at Snowden.
« on: October 12, 2015, 11:05:53 PM »
They will always complain about currently relevant information resulting in negative consequences for undergoing operations.
But the fact no where near all the info has been leaked should really defuse the concerns that Snowden is just some irresponsible caution-to-the-wind kiddy.
Also him fleeing to America's enemies is a direct result of American aggression. No NATO state would be safe to reside in, might as well choose a country that is actually capable of protecting you and not some backwater shit.

1455
I didn't feel anything before I was born, there's no compelling evidence suggesting I'll feel after, and a lot of sound reasoning suggesting it's the end.
One could assert that you just had no mechanism of memory before being born. After all none of us can describe the experience of being <2 yet we know we experienced that. Of course it's impossible to describe how experience can be had with no tangible object, I'm just playing devil's advocate for the argument of "I didn't feel being alive before this."

But this raises a great question of how does a being with no aspect of memory experience reality, which to me seems like it couldn't.

1456
The Flood / Re: Let Jester rate you
« on: October 12, 2015, 10:52:16 PM »

1457
The Flood / Re: Let Jester rate you
« on: October 12, 2015, 10:48:18 PM »
orthodox music is da bomb

1458
No.
We're not our bodies, we are souls temporarily inhabiting a body. The soul is eternal.
What makes you think this is true? Genuinely curious.
I said it to piss off the Empiricists.
Empiricism it seems, has the most dogmatic, bigoted and closed-minded group of followers I've ever seen.
Anything bordering mystical, esoteric, or metaphysical is shut down and discarded as "pseudoscience" or "woo woo" and is considered not even worthy of study.

The problem with empiricism is that it shuns every form of enquiry that doesn't follow the guidelines of scientific Materialism (the view that the universe is just the interactions of observable matter) and conventional science.

Don't get me wrong, Emperical science is useful in explaining the interactions of the physical world, but that's it limit.
Discussion without empiricism is redundant and pointless.
A metaphysical discussion is one that transcends the authority of logic itself.
Case in point.
I want an actual answer here.
What is the value of a conversation where all positions and assertions are fundamentally equal?
A discussion where Einsteinian gravity is of equal merit as me smashing my keyboard devalues the idea of communication.

1459
Discussion without empiricism is redundant and pointless.
A metaphysical discussion is one that transcends the authority of logic itself.
This may be true, but as we've discussed many times, the phenomenon of existence goes beyond empirical matters, no?
I suppose so, but it's really impossible to talk about outside recognizing how strange it is.

1460
Gaming / Re: FUCK. AGAR.
« on: October 12, 2015, 10:34:16 PM »
>mobile
i feel sorry for you

1461
No.
We're not our bodies, we are souls temporarily inhabiting a body. The soul is eternal.
What makes you think this is true? Genuinely curious.
I said it to piss off the Empiricists.
Empiricism it seems, has the most dogmatic, bigoted and closed-minded group of followers I've ever seen.
Anything bordering mystical, esoteric, or metaphysical is shut down and discarded as "pseudoscience" or "woo woo" and is considered not even worthy of study.

The problem with empiricism is that it shuns every form of enquiry that doesn't follow the guidelines of scientific Materialism (the view that the universe is just the interactions of observable matter) and conventional science.

Don't get me wrong, Emperical science is useful in explaining the interactions of the physical world, but that's it limit.
Discussion without empiricism is redundant and pointless.
A metaphysical discussion is one that transcends the authority of logic itself.

1462
Serious / Re: 4chan (/b/) more inclusive than tumblr?
« on: October 12, 2015, 09:54:12 PM »
both of those sites are shit social mediums and are only useful for the exchange of porn

1463
The Flood / Re: Is Japan the weirdest country?
« on: October 12, 2015, 09:53:08 PM »
you say weird like all of those things are weird
it wouldnt be popular if it was weird
where is your avatar from bruv
literally usersub on imgur
idk

1464
The Flood / Re: Is Japan the weirdest country?
« on: October 12, 2015, 08:19:40 PM »
you say weird like all of those things are weird
it wouldnt be popular if it was weird

1465
I choose to believe so because if death is not a true end then I am doomed regardless. I will have an infinite amount of time to suffer and an infinite amount of time to cope. The afterlife does not make this life more valuable, because infinite existence will only continually diminish how much of this life was part of my total life.

1466
Serious / Re: How rare do you think intelligent life is in space?
« on: October 12, 2015, 07:24:59 PM »
It's two huge logical jumps to assume that 1) aliens would be more advanced than us, and 2) that traveling long distances of space, such as with light speed or another means, is even possible. Among others.
I don't think so.
Provide reason or your idea is trash.
Your inability to understand the difference between 13 billion and 200,000 is showing.
1. Life likely only existed during a fraction of that timeframe.
2. You have yet to demonstrate reason as to why anyone would choose to cover that tremendous distance.
3. Human life has been evident from space for the tinniest fraction of time, an advanced race would have to first wait for our light to reach them, and then they'd have to make the long journey to us, in which time we could very well be dead, making their journey useless.
1. assumptions
2. assumptions about what reason a species would do things for
3. assuming that the species would not have a means of detecting things beyond light speed, that they can't travel beyond it, or that this is the only dimension/plane of existence accessible and that they choose to stay in it.

This debate is entirely assumptions.
Some assumptions are sound to make because they are based in observation, some are not because they dive into realms of unknown unknowns.

1467
Serious / Re: How rare do you think intelligent life is in space?
« on: October 12, 2015, 07:19:30 PM »
Verb, please keep in mind that according to Newtonian physics, it takes 1.123*10^18 J to accelerate a 100kg object to half the speed of light (the actual energy is higher because of relativity).

The total energy consumption of humanity right now is estimated to be 5.598*10^20 J according to Wikipedia.

Explain to me how you would go about travelling to look for alien life (since you assume they would if they existed) yourself.
To be fair humanities power output 200 years ago was probably below 10^4
Egg you eat more than that in a day fucking lol
fuck well good thing we're working with joules this week in physics

1468
Serious / Re: How rare do you think intelligent life is in space?
« on: October 12, 2015, 07:17:21 PM »
Verb, please keep in mind that according to Newtonian physics, it takes 1.123*10^18 J to accelerate a 100kg object to half the speed of light (the actual energy is higher because of relativity).

The total energy consumption of humanity right now is estimated to be 5.598*10^20 J according to Wikipedia.

Explain to me how you would go about travelling to look for alien life (since you assume they would if they existed) yourself.
To be fair humanities power output 200 years ago was probably below 10^4

1469
Serious / Re: How rare do you think intelligent life is in space?
« on: October 12, 2015, 07:15:56 PM »
There's no reason to assert that if they existed they would choose to visit us even, they could very easily just choose to ignore us. What you are positing has zero basis and zero significance. Even if they could travel at light speed, it would take a tremendous amount of time to reach us.
13 billion years is a little more than a tremendous amount of time, bucko.

Nothing you're saying is convincing me that aliens exist, and you never will. Go cry now. I'm getting bored of this.
Yknow I know you put yourself above the opinions of others but I'm going to put it down for the record that I used to think you at least had some self respect for the ideas in your own head, enough to properly defend them anyways. What I've seen here really makes me have to question whether what you say is a joke mired in irony from now on.

1470
Serious / Re: How rare do you think intelligent life is in space?
« on: October 12, 2015, 07:12:35 PM »
It's two huge logical jumps to assume that 1) aliens would be more advanced than us, and 2) that traveling long distances of space, such as with light speed or another means, is even possible. Among others.
I don't think so.
Provide reason or your idea is trash.
Your inability to understand the difference between 13 billion and 200,000 is showing.
1. Life likely only existed during a fraction of that timeframe.
2. You have yet to demonstrate reason as to why anyone would choose to cover that tremendous distance.
3. Human life has been evident from space for the tinniest fraction of time, an advanced race would have to first wait for our light to reach them, and then they'd have to make the long journey to us, in which time we could very well be dead, making their journey useless.

Pages: 1 ... 474849 5051 ... 84