Comments

  • Philosophical Pharma
    Lumen naturale i.e. the light of reason, used to be at odds with some religions, but no longer according to deism.

    Newton's flaming laser sword aka Alder's razor - if it's not testable, go to hell!

    Occam's razor. :kiss:

    Simplify, simplify, simplify. — Steve Jobs

    In the same vein, the goddess of wisdom in Buddhism wields a flaming sword ... and a book.

    Cold, :heart: less, rigid, inflexible logic

    Live long and prosper :victory: — Spock (science officer, USS Enterprise)
  • Emergence
    The wise fool is just a contradiction in terms imo.
    I like the fact that you use the term singularity, more as an indication of a pivotal point of a change of great significance, rather than the more common suggestion that the tec singularity oft suggested would be the beginning of our demise. It may be the beginning of our ascension to a vastly more interesting physical existence.     — universeness

    That's one of many ways to look at it. As far as I can see, it's not an issue of whether to live or die, but rather how we wanna die? Agree @180 Proof?
  • Is the blue pill the rational choice?
    happiness and truth — baker

    So much for hedonism.
  • The ineffable
    [ ... ] And therfore, mes amies, we must eat in silence — Ashok Kumar
  • Atheism and Lack of belief
    We've already danced at this rodeo not long ago, amigo:
    https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/763662 :halo:     — 180 Proof

    My memory betrays me mon ami! Pardon.
  • Respectful Dialog
    ↪Pantagruel
    :snicker:
  • Respectful Dialog
    "John, F**k you!" said Mary. "F**k you too" replied John. The ice cream truck trundled along outside, "F**k you, F**k you, F**k you" it went. I wanted an ice cream. I walked up to the truck, greeted the nice ice cream man and said, "F**k you." He replied with a big smile on his face, "F**k you". I passed a beggar, with an ice cream in my hand, looked at him, "F**ck you!" said he. I, to the beggar, "Fuck you too!" Dropped some coins into his cup!

    I walked past some senior citizens im the park, playing chess. They were exchanging words, "Fuck you!" "Fuck you too!" I saw a newspaper stand, looked at the headlines, "FUCK YOU!, FUCK ALL OF YOU!" That's some news. I had to tell my friend. I whipped my phone out, then scrolled through my contacts, Fuck you 1, Fuck you 2, Fuck you 3, that's my friend, Fuck you 3. I dialled his number. He answered. "Hey Fuck you 3, FUCK YOU! FUCK ALL OF YOU!" I screamed, unable to contain my excitement. "Fuck you too!" came the reply.     — Flash Fiction and Writing Prompts

    :rofl:
  • Atheism and Lack of belief
    I can't suss out from the post what exactly you're invitinh me to investigate, Smith. Care to elaborate? — 180 Proof

    Beliefs are statements that can be true/false.

    God exists is a belief, it's a statement.

    God doesn't exist is a belief, it's a statement.

    So, if atheism is a lack of belief, it's missing a corresponding thesis/statement, oui? It, obviously, can't claim god doesn't exist because that's a belief.
  • Atheism and Lack of belief
    ↪god must be atheist
    Superb observation. It's quite clear we're cleaning up the mess created by someone else, whoever it was that claimed atheism is a lack of belief. It is a silly thread in that respect, but not entirely - it's an opportunity to explore what went wrong - did this person or these persons unknown :cool: not know the meaning of the word "belief" or is it just a knee jerk response to deflect (intense) crticism from the opposing camp (theists), "Prove it! Go on!". I invite @180 Proof to investigate this further if he has the time and resources to spare.
  • Emergence
    Like @180 Proof says, the TS (the technological singularity) might've already taken place - we're just failing to notice it, just like some of us fail to see God (deux ex machina - read the short, short story Answer by Fredric Brown).

    There is no reason to why the TS can't happen.

    1. The biological singularity: Life from inanimate matter (bacteria)
    2. The cognitive singularity: Mind from life (primates, dolphins, etc.)
    ---
    3. The technological singularity: Übermind from mind (machine/nonbiological superintelligence, kind courtesy human/biological intelligence)

    What makes me hair stand on end (not out fear but out of wonder) is whether this is gonna be an ouroboros. Mind = No Mind i.e. the wise fool.
  • Why is the Hard Problem of Consciousness so hard?
    It's very simple why the hard problem of consciousness is hard - consciousness is unobservable, a necessity if science has to take a shot at explaining it. Hence I recommend the Eastern approach of meditation (self-reflection) if we are to make any headway in the field of consciousness studies. However this is not an either-or kinda deal I'm offering. I recall hearing/reading how, under the aegis of the present Dalai Lama, high lamas, experts in meditation, collaborated with American and European neuroscientists to deepen our understanding of the mind. Anyone with links to that research?
  • Forced beliefs?
    Eppur si muove! — Galileo Galilei

    Argumentum ad baculum (argument from the stick)

    Argumentum ad carota (argument from the carrot)

    The Muslim conquest of Africa and central Asia and South Asia involved conversion by the sword.

    Christian proselytizing is largely accomplished with the daucus carota subsp. sativus.
  • Hindsight Analysis
    Well, to be fair to all the hindsight experts, foresight is, I, think, orders of magnitude more difficult. That said, part of the 20/20 vision of the former is information on some folks who did correctly predict, or at least mentioned relevant factors regarding, an event in question, but were ignored for various reasons.

    In a sense then those who have the gift of foresight go unheard. This is part and parcel of complexity as far as I can tell and is likely to stay this way until someone who has the goods finds a solution. Until such a time, expect hindsight analyses to dominate our lives as they have and as they do.

    Also there's a psychological need to seek explanations for stuff that went right and stuff that went wrong. Perhaps hindsight analysis is exactly what a shrink would order for your mental well-being.
  • Aristotelian logic: why do “first principles” not need to be proven?
    Methinks a first principle (is there a Latin term for it?) is one the falsity of which entails a contradiction or is self-refuting.

    F = There are some truths

    If F is false then ~F = there are no truths. ~F is true (F is false) AND ~F is false (~F says there are no truths).

    If F is false then ~F is true, but ~F says there are no truths so ~F is false (self-refuting)

    @Wayfarer (self-referential paradoxes, re the Gödel sentence: this statement is unprovable).

    Global skepticism too is said to be self-refuting and so is relativism according to quite a number of philosophers.
  • Letter to Aristotle
    human brain is really just a ventilation system — Tom Storm

    Not entirely impossible - the sulci and gyri (folds) of our brains do resemble radiator fins.

    The Radiator fins are surfaces that extend from the radiator to increase the rate of heat transfer to or from the environment by increasing convection. They are the zig zag metal strips found between the radiator panels.

    ↪Paine
    Arguing like children and that speaks volumes. A is at time T1 and later at time T2. A's age changes but A = A. If A is older/younger than itself A must be at both times T1 and T2, but that's incorrect, A is at time T2 presently, A was at time T2. . We can say A is older now, at time T2, compared to A at time T1.
  • Antinatalism Arguments
    Are you familiar with any of Schopenhauer’s philosophy? — schopenhauer1

    Doe it not include suffering & (premature) death in reasons why life sucks?
  • Antinatalism Arguments
    There is no “they” prior to existence being forced into anything. The parent is deciding to impose something and that is what is relevant. — schopenhauer1

    There was also no one there to ask for consent to life. Just as there is no one there for consent to non-life.

    Not really. It’s a measure of something but not what is the case with human suffering. — schopenhauer1

    What would be a good measure of human suffering then?
  • Antinatalism Arguments
    ↪schopenhauer1


    I agree this - what we have here at the moment - is for sure not paradise. You forgot to mention progress with regard to the problem of suffering - life expectancy for example went up from, what?, 40s to now 70s (global average) and how long you live is a pretty good measure of well-being if you ask me. You shouldn't ignore this proven fact if you base your argument on dukkha, oui?

    Like I admitted, it's hard to disagree with your forced-to-play-the-game argument. It is, how shall I put it?, the little fly in the ointment, the David that brings Goliath down. However, it just dawned on me, pessimists/antinatlists, for the exact same reason, can't advocate for abstaining from having children. They, in this case, are being forced-not-to-play-the-game, oui monsieur? It seems we're at an impasse. The card you've always been playing is not exactly to your advantage.
  • Antinatalism Arguments
    ↪schopenhauer1


    Gracias, I was finding it difficult to explain pessimism in the modern world after what I wrote in my last post. Suffering is no longer a viable reason, it has lost its force as a convincing justification, for pessimism as the OP suggests and I concur (statistics clearly show an upward trend in overall well-being).

    This, to me, weakens your forced-to-play-the-game argument. The game is (going to be a whole lot of) fun! Who wouldn't want to play; nevertheless, choice is a basic sentient right. Even if I were to be taken to paradise, I would prefer to be asked "paradise, yes/no? A quick question though: Would you rather be offered a cake even when you don't want it or would you prefer not to be asked at all, whether you would like some cake?
  • Antinatalism Arguments
    Read the first paragraph of the Wikipedia page on philosophical pessimism. All in all, to ascribe a negative value to life; in vernacular, the game ain't worth the candle.

    Reasons for philosophical pessimism

    1. Suffering (greatly) exceeds happiness

    2. The universe on the whole and even our dear ol' planet earth is on the whole anti-life; imagine having to navigate a boobytrapped übercomplex maze.

    3. Life is meaningless

    As the OP correctly identifies, these hard facts mirror the Buddha's distillation of what life is in the 4 Noble Truths (dukkha). It's quite odd that the pessimism that prevailed in 500 bC ancient India rang true in 17th century Europe and that it still makes sense to be pessimistic in the 21st century. Not much has changed then, oui?

    This, however, may be a mistake, one that is all too easy to make. There's been a sea change in our circumstances - science and technology have drastically reduced suffering and that's not all, the duo has promised even greater prizes such as ... :zip: not a word, ya hear! ... resurrection, immortality, mind uploading, etc.

    To get right to the point then, there are problems, but a few of them if not all at some point seem remediable. Pessimism then is a defeatist attitude - it fails to take into account the subtleties and nuances of the problem of suffering and also the solutions.
  • What should be done with the galaxy?
    Don't be so quick to dismiss the galaxy as worthless. You know that life on earth evolved in an environment that includes galactic influences, be it miniscule levels of gravity and light (especially at night). May be these are to life on the planet as trace elements (elements like Selenium, vital to survival but found only in extremely low concentrations) are to the human body.
  • Cavemen and Libertarians
    More testosterone? — Bradskii

    :lol: I forgot what testosterone does to the body. I believe it increases muscle mass (bodybuilders), makes you (hyper)aggressive, hairier, horny, etc. Basically it puts the male/female in FF mode (fight/fuck).

    Anyway, the point is testesterone makes a man out of a boy in the traditional (sex + protection) sense. No wonder!
  • Cavemen and Libertarians
    I've often thought that for me to be here, some of my ancestors must have, at some time, done a few really horrendous things. Take a direct line back and there were obviously some really bad dudes on that family tree — Bradskii

    Why do good girls like bad boys? :chin:
  • Yes man/woman
    I knew some really good-bad people who could've made offers I couldn't possibly have refused. They never put me in a position that could jeopardize me. They never asked, they could have, but didn't. I was deprived of the opportunity to be a yes man! Bless their souls wherever they are now! Amazing people, right?

    To answer the question, I'd say it would depend on the kinda people who make the proposals. If good, one should find oneself in a warm, cozy spot; if bad, ouch time!

    P. S. I'm a pushover.
  • Cryptocurrency
    ↪Tzeentch
    Crypto then was a shadow banking system - it must be part of the so-called dark web.
  • A re-think on the permanent status of 'Banned'?
    Hang in there, buddy. You have a lot to offer beyond the goofiness at times. — jgill

    :lol:

    Jesus, if they keep me, they must keep Agent Smith. — Banno

    :lol:

    Now that I think of it, I should really consider a reevaluation of me values and overall direction of my forum life. I'll treat the suspensions hangings as NDEs. :smile:

    It's a conspiracy to have me tarred and feathered I tell you. The mods are all working for Putin! :lol:
  • Cryptocurrency
    Yes, the main cause is substitute the money and banking system as we know nowadays. Nonetheless, it is used just for speculative conspiracies and opaque businesses. — javi2541997

    It's a money laundering scheme. How fascinating.
  • Cryptocurrency
    Any investment is essentially an alternate banking system. — Tzeentch

    True, true. Then there's something different about crypto. Does it bypass some regulations? It must otherwise it's just a geeky way of doing regular business.
  • Life is just a bunch of distractions
    This meme I can relate to, havta share.

    1. Birth.
    2. WTF??!!
    3. Death
  • Cavemen and Libertarians
    Methinks the reason why there were no police & laws in the past is the very same reason why we need police & laws now. The morally-challenged were evolutionarily successful (might was right) and the good were simply killed off. Now, I somehow don't feel as proud about my ancestry anymore, not that there was anything there to begin with, its bad vs. bad or worse vs. bad and then we had an eureka moment, what?, about a thousand years ago, give/take 500 - we needed to put some of us in uniform & given arms to, well, save us from ourselves. In the process, I conjecture, some dormant genes have resurfaced and we see quite a number of really good peeps out there, doin' their bit in their own small way. God, if you exist, please bless 'em.

    Kali Yuga mes amies, just round the corner!

    Evil comes naturally or did you forget?
  • Cryptocurrency
    It's just a matter of time before regulators swoop down on alternate banking systems. A coupla million is peanuts, but let the volume of cryptos hit the billions and you'll feel the noose tightening. It's one of those schemes that was never meant for greatness. Me talking outta my arse again. Pardon, pardon. Ignore me, oh, you have already. :pray:
  • The Prevalent Mentality
    groups larger than 50 - 100 are, I think, unstable and it shows - large cities tend to have high crime rates.
    — Agent Smith
    Two things about that.
    100 doesn't provide a big enough gene pool or work force for self preservation. It needs to be at least 1000 - but, IMO, not more than 10,000 for sustainable population and governance.
    And the crime rate in modern industrial urban settings is a product of economic and organizational factors more than simple numbers.     — Vera Mont

    Agreed! My analysis leaves much to be desired.
  • A re-think on the permanent status of 'Banned'?
    ↪Jack Cummins
    Good advice! Muchas gracias.
  • Response to Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism
    I wonder how the concepts of lumen naturale (reason alone), lumen fidei (revelation), and lumen gratiae (divinely assisted reason) are related to Plantinga's argument. He probably could use one of these three ways of ensuring the the reliability of reason.
  • Logic and Evidence: What is the Interplay and What are Fallacies in Philosophical Arguments?
    Logic is basically, as one author so eloquently put it, the art of thinking well. The point, as far as I can see, to logic is establish a connection between propositions of which there are usually 3, 2 premises and 1 conclusion (the classic syllogism, another name for an argument) - the connection aka inferential link is between the two premises and the one conclusion. The premises constitute the evidence.

    A succinct and general way to describe inferential link is that the truth of the premises means the conclusion is also true to varying degrees of certainty depending on whether the argument is deductive, inductive or abductive. To elaborate, inferential links are determine by, as Aristotle and Chyrsippus found out, certain argument forms which seem to either guarantee or increase the likelihood of the conclusion being true given the premises are.

    All fallacies can be put under the rubric of the most general description of reasoning gone wrong which is non sequitur (it does not follow). That is to say the proffered evidence doesn't support the conclusion. There are sundry ways this can happen - they've been named and classified by logicians since antiquity.
  • A re-think on the permanent status of 'Banned'?
    Confiteor, I've been suspended thrice. I feel like Puss in Boots against :death: in the new animation The Last Wish (released 2023). This is me last life mateys! :grin: Set sail ya ugly bunch of landlubbers! We have an appointment to keep with Thanatos!!
  • Atheism and Lack of belief
    God has been compared to a Leprechaun by some very clear-headed thinkers who were puzzling over the fact that there's no aleprechaunism (as a label for those who don't believe Leprechauns exist) while there's atheism, a term that draws all the wrong kinda attention (from religious fundamentalists). Here a fatwa, there a fatwa, everywhere a fatwa, fatwa, fatwa! :grin:

    Atheism as lack of belief in God is to say that atheism is not a belief that needs to be addressed (if the boxer in one corner of the ring hasn't even risen to fight, the opponent in the other corner is ____ (lack of belief).
  • Response to Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism
    Can we not use a variation of Euthyphro's dilemma against Plantinga's insightful argument? Is our logic reliable because God wills it OR does God will it because logic is reliable? Either logic is arbitrary or God is redundant. Tough call theist pals.
  • Response to Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism
    I believe the Thin Alchemist had an identical view — Wayfarer

    :lol:
  • Response to Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism
    Philosophy aspires to something more than utility. — Wayfarer

    :up:

    Utility is base metal, what we're looking for is gold. — The Fat Alchemist
Home » Agent Smith