>dude QUALIA lmao

>dude QUALIA lmao
it's literally just consciousness
no need to make up mystic terms you fricking pseuds

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >pic
    >getting rid of banks is ... le bad
    I knew it. The anti-consciousness shill/spam threads are paid for by Blackrock and the WEF.
    I will not eat the bugs. I will not live in the pod. I will own a lot.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >HNNNGGGGG PRIVATE PROPERTYYYY
      >wait no not like that
      You WILL eat the bugs and you WILL own nothing and it WILL be your own fault

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >those evil communists want to take away your private property
        >therefore you must support a system where all private property is owned by Blackrock and you are forced to live in eternal poverty
        Frick the false dichotomy. Islamic economics is the solution.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >haha yesss I WILL own a lot
          >wtf other people already own a lot, that's not how it's supposed to work???

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            There are enough resources on this planet for everyone to live in moderate wealth. The only problem is that 99% of the resources have been hoarded by a small group of ultrarich psychopaths who refuse to share.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, that's what happens with private ownership.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Sharing is for commies!
            >wtf no one wants to share with me!

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm doing my part by sharing my wife.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >dude TRIG lmao
    it's literally just geometry
    no need to make up mystic terms you fricking pseuds

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      define qualia without inventing mystic terms

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        You're a filtered NPC

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >ad hominem

          Explain existence without inventing mystic terms.

          >whataboutism

          I accept your concession.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Explain existence without inventing mystic terms.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        (You)r EXPERIENCE is SUBJECTIVE to (You).

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          That's a statement. Qualia is a noun. Nouns cannot have statements as meanings.

          Perhaps you meant "your experience that is subjective to you", in which case it literally means the same thing as "experience", because your experience is already subjective to you by definition.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Nouns cannot have statements as meanings.
            Define a word without a statement. Any word will do.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Define a word without a statement.
            You're confused. I never said "nouns cannot be defined USING a statement", I said "nouns cannot have statements as meanings".
            Since you seem barely literate, let me give you a simple example:
            >apple: fruit which grows on an apple tree
            this is a definition of a noun
            >apple: fruit grows on an apple tree
            this is not a valid definition of a noun

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        What I am currently experiencing. Done.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          That's literally just the definition of consciousness.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yes.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        where is your nose? (theres your nose! / i dont have a nose)
        where is your computer? (theres your computer! / i dont have a computer)
        where is your experience? ( [Q1: exercise left to the reader] / i dont have an experience)

        whatever your answer, compare it to the previous answers and consider the difference 🙂

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          not a definition

          you know what it's like having a computer or not. you know what it's like having consciousness. but you have no experience of non-consciousness. since the consciousness itself is what allows you to be aware of it. you can't be aware of not being conscious

          meds

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Who said it was a definition?
            You cant be aware of not being conscious.
            Thats not a definition

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I asked for a definition and you replied to me

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            i'm

            where is your nose? (theres your nose! / i dont have a nose)
            where is your computer? (theres your computer! / i dont have a computer)
            where is your experience? ( [Q1: exercise left to the reader] / i dont have an experience)

            whatever your answer, compare it to the previous answers and consider the difference 🙂

            , the other guy who replied is not me. the definition is trivial for experience-havers, so i gave a brief exercise to help you think it through. if, after giving it your best shot, you're still perplexed, then i wouldn't worry about it because presumably you aren't experiencing any perplexment.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >it's literally just consciousness
    it do be like that

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Science cannot tell me that I have no subjective experience of the world, because it would be wrong. I think therefore I am.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      What does that have to do with qualia?
      It's literally just consciousness.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >X is just Y
        >muh reductionism
        >noooo, I hate cognitive complexity
        >only one gender, one race, everything is the same
        >stop calling it poopoo, it's actually anal peepee
        >don't force me to distinguish concepts, nooooo
        >frick definitions
        Behold, the newest stage of anti-intellectual idiocracy. Soon they will mock us for knowing how to wipe our own ass. I guess that's also too intellectual for OP.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >"qualia exists!!!"
          >ok so what does that word mean and how exactly does it differ from consciousness?
          >"UMMM... UR DUMM!!!"
          absolute state of ~~*qualia*~~ morons

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >blind man keeps getting filtered by the concept of colors

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >anon keeps insulting because he is unable to answer a simple question
            Many such cases in pseudoscience.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            > how exactly does it differ from consciousness
            The term qualia is used to describe the FACT that your experience (the conscious state of 5 senses available to humans communicating with a brain that create a coherent experience where the observer is (You) is SUBJECTIVE which has implications such as if all of our collective worlds are subjective then what the frick is reality if not a collective best guess and that's spooky because we can't really know what real is.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The term qualia is used to describe the FACT that your experience (the conscious state of 5 senses available to humans communicating with a brain that create a coherent experience where the observer is (You))* is SUBJECTIVE
            So you invented a whole new term just say "hurr durr you can't know nuffin"?
            Lmao.

            It's LITERALLY bringing nothing new to the table.
            It LITERALLY means exactly the same as the word "consciousness".
            And I'm gonna prove it right here with a challenge:

            Provide one (1) example of a sentence that would lose meaning if the word "qualia" in it was replaced by the word "consciousness".

            If you fail to do so, you prove once and for all that "qualia" and "consciousness" mean one and the same thing.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The term qualia is used to describe the FACT that your consciousness is subjective
            All that screeching and you've done zero thinking. Why even bother posting on here? I can demonstrate qualia is a term that describes the state of consciousness as subjective because it's the definition of a term can you demonstrate consciousness is subjective?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            New nouns are invented to create a subset of meanings from other words. Qualia is literally just a statement pretending to be a noun.

            Just say "consciousness is subjective", you autist. Inventing a new word for "subjective consciousness" implies that "objective consciousness" exists, which is in contradiction to your very definition of "qualia".

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Because we can't fricking know. It's an admission of ignorance. You speak in absolutes, that's shit science.

            >Define a word without a statement.
            You're confused. I never said "nouns cannot be defined USING a statement", I said "nouns cannot have statements as meanings".
            Since you seem barely literate, let me give you a simple example:
            >apple: fruit which grows on an apple tree
            this is a definition of a noun
            >apple: fruit grows on an apple tree
            this is not a valid definition of a noun

            >You're confused.
            One of us is because meaning is what's communicated in a statement which is the definition of defining a term so if we extrapolate your distinction without a difference is larping. Stop doing that.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Because we can't fricking know
            Meanwhile:

            > how exactly does it differ from consciousness
            The term qualia is used to describe the FACT that your experience (the conscious state of 5 senses available to humans communicating with a brain that create a coherent experience where the observer is (You) is SUBJECTIVE which has implications such as if all of our collective worlds are subjective then what the frick is reality if not a collective best guess and that's spooky because we can't really know what real is.

            >The term qualia is used to describe the FACT that your experience
            So which one is it? Do we know or not know?

            >meaning is what's communicated in a statement which is the definition of defining a term
            Qualia is a noun. Nouns refer to things. Nouns don't refer to statements. Defining nouns as statements make no linguistic sense, because we use nouns to make statements.
            If you define qualia as statement
            >consciousness is subjective
            then the statement
            >qualia has properties X and Y
            becomes
            >"consciousness is subjective" has properties X and Y
            which is completely meaningless.
            Nouns can only be defined using other nouns and statements, e.g. "qualia is consciousness which is subjective".

            Defining qualia as "subjective consciousness" either implies that there *is* such a thing as objective consciousness, or means exactly the same as "consciousness".
            So which is it?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >So which is it?
            >Because we can't fricking know
            This one.
            >So which one is it? Do we know or not know?
            Within the scope of the term qualia we do.
            >Qualia is a noun. Nouns refer to things.
            Yes, the thing being the instance of mind as a subjective entity.
            >Defining nouns as statements make no linguistic sense
            You need to make a statement to define anything which is what communicates meaning. So the notion of
            >Nouns cannot have statements as meanings.
            is moronic. You can't have meaning without a statement and without meaning a noun doesn't exist.
            >which is completely meaningless.
            An ability to abstract is important. If you run your fingers through your hair (assuming not bald) is that experience not a property of consciousness is subjective tm?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Learn to read, moron. I've literally asked three times if you define "qualia" as "subjective consciousness" or not. Until you answer, there's no point in even answering your "muh statement is a noun" babble.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Too stupid to have conversation. 10-4. Epic own, anon. Good job.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >can't answer a simple yes or no question
            Yes, you truly are too stupid to have a* conversation.

            Yes.

            Then why invent another word for it?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >epic grammer get
            >can't into a thing that's been stated several times
            The wonders of midwit.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >defines word in a linguistically nonsensical way
            >refuses to elaborate or discuss
            holy chas

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >refuses to elaborate or discuss

            (You)r EXPERIENCE is SUBJECTIVE to (You).

            >refuses to elaborate or discuss

            >Nouns cannot have statements as meanings.
            Define a word without a statement. Any word will do.

            >refuses to elaborate or discuss

            Because we can't fricking know. It's an admission of ignorance. You speak in absolutes, that's shit science.
            [...]
            >You're confused.
            One of us is because meaning is what's communicated in a statement which is the definition of defining a term so if we extrapolate your distinction without a difference is larping. Stop doing that.

            >refuses to elaborate or discuss

            >So which is it?
            >Because we can't fricking know
            This one.
            >So which one is it? Do we know or not know?
            Within the scope of the term qualia we do.
            >Qualia is a noun. Nouns refer to things.
            Yes, the thing being the instance of mind as a subjective entity.
            >Defining nouns as statements make no linguistic sense
            You need to make a statement to define anything which is what communicates meaning. So the notion of
            >Nouns cannot have statements as meanings.
            is moronic. You can't have meaning without a statement and without meaning a noun doesn't exist.
            >which is completely meaningless.
            An ability to abstract is important. If you run your fingers through your hair (assuming not bald) is that experience not a property of consciousness is subjective tm?

            What do the words elaborate and discuss mean to you? If you can't grapple with the subject matter no matter what I say is going to have the same outcome. Why bang my head against the wall? Demonstrate capacity for understanding by being able to separate qualia and consciousness as the distinction has been stated several times. If you can't steelman my point it means you don't understand it. For example, your argument is that qualia and consciousness communicate the same idea because it is a fact to (You) that consciousness is subjective to an individual, and you don't see a reason to invent new words that say subjective subjective thing because 1 it's a tautology and 2 it creates a distinction that implies an objective consciousness can exist.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >why invent another word for it?
            why not?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Provide one (1) example of a sentence that would lose meaning if the word "qualia" in it was replaced by the word "consciousness".
            Analytic spook. Nice try

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Provide one (1) example of a sentence that would lose meaning if the word "qualia" in it was replaced by the word "consciousness".
            Qualia is a part of consciousness. They're always trying to define it with reference to particular experiences like "redness" instead of something more universal like "being".
            >The part is more than the sum of its parts.
            All wholes are parts of something bigger, so you can get rid of "whole" if your goal is to make your audience work harder.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >I think therefore I am.
      >the part that thinks is the part having a subjective experience
      so what happens when you arent thinking? you cease existing?

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    0/10 post. saged

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Whenever I have a wank, my faptop is experiencing the images when I flip through my 2TB of AI-generated furry porn. And you can't prove otherwise.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    "Consciousness" is sometimes used in a more functional sense. Like you could have a robot that might have states that would be analogous to being asleep vs "conscious", or two modes of thinking analogous to system 1 and 2 thinking in humans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow where the system 2 would be more "conscious" type of thinking.

    This all is distinct from the question of inner subjective experience, feelings etc. and there "being something that is like to be that thing", to use an expression that probably triggers some people. Qualia is explicitly about all of these. Where as if we had a robot exhibiting the more functional sense of consciousness or self-awareness (in the sense of having a self-model), it wouldn't be clear whether it also had qualia or not. Plus qualia's a nice short word. Consciousness is a bit of a misnomer for inner subjective experience anyway, like in most contexts outside of philosophy we wouldn't call a person who is sleeping and dreaming "conscious", even though they are having subjective experiences.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >umm robots can be conscious, but don't have qualia!
      >but sleeping human has qualia! even though it is not conscious...
      lmao that's just an arbitrary description of the words, and doesn't really explain the fundamental difference of qualia and consciousness.
      why would I even agree to those statements?

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    i do not belive in killing people
    op is right and killers only make profit for home owners and job providers, who need replaced immigrants

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    There are some things that cannot be reduced. If someone fails to understand intuitively what 1+1=2 means then no further explanation will help that person. Same goes for qualia. The concept should appeal instantly to intuition. If it doesn't then no attempt at a seemingly rigorous definition and no effort of examples or analogies will help that person.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >hurr durr you're supposed to intuitively understand this random word I just made up

      The statement "1+1=2" can be explained in millions of ways to help a person gain intuition, and to help them understand how it's different from the statement "if you have $1 and I give you $1 you will have $2".
      If it couldn't, it would be a completely meaningless statement.

      Why can't qualia?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        As expected, you failed to understand.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          As expected, you state the obvious and refuse to discuss or elaborate.

          If you don't plan on giving any new input, feel free to leave.

          >refuses to elaborate or discuss
          [...]
          >refuses to elaborate or discuss
          [...]
          >refuses to elaborate or discuss
          [...]
          >refuses to elaborate or discuss
          [...]
          What do the words elaborate and discuss mean to you? If you can't grapple with the subject matter no matter what I say is going to have the same outcome. Why bang my head against the wall? Demonstrate capacity for understanding by being able to separate qualia and consciousness as the distinction has been stated several times. If you can't steelman my point it means you don't understand it. For example, your argument is that qualia and consciousness communicate the same idea because it is a fact to (You) that consciousness is subjective to an individual, and you don't see a reason to invent new words that say subjective subjective thing because 1 it's a tautology and 2 it creates a distinction that implies an objective consciousness can exist.

          >What do the words elaborate and discuss mean to you?
          Let's start with a direct definition of "qualia" that is linguistically valid and is just a straightforward sentence and not a paragraph of schizo word salad.

          >why invent another word for it?
          why not?

          Because simple is better than complicated.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >steelman my argument
            >schizo word salad.
            epic

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >won't provide a coherent definition of a word
            >demands the other person to steelman his """arguments"""
            Nah, man. If you won't put a minimum amount of effort to provide us with a common ground we can start with, I sure as hell will not engage in deconstructing your arguments, as you will just pour more and more bullshit in order to tire me out.
            See Brandolini's law.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >provide us with a common ground we can start with
            My contention is the common ground is out of your depth because what you're asking for is already in this thread.

            > how exactly does it differ from consciousness
            The term qualia is used to describe the FACT that your experience (the conscious state of 5 senses available to humans communicating with a brain that create a coherent experience where the observer is (You) is SUBJECTIVE which has implications such as if all of our collective worlds are subjective then what the frick is reality if not a collective best guess and that's spooky because we can't really know what real is.

            >used to describe the FACT that your experience (the conscious state of 5 senses available to humans communicating with a brain that create a coherent experience where the observer is (You) is SUBJECTIVE

            >The term qualia is used to describe the FACT that your consciousness is subjective
            All that screeching and you've done zero thinking. Why even bother posting on here? I can demonstrate qualia is a term that describes the state of consciousness as subjective because it's the definition of a term can you demonstrate consciousness is subjective?

            > I can demonstrate qualia is a term that describes the state of consciousness as subjective because it's the definition of a term

            Because we can't fricking know. It's an admission of ignorance. You speak in absolutes, that's shit science.
            [...]
            >You're confused.
            One of us is because meaning is what's communicated in a statement which is the definition of defining a term so if we extrapolate your distinction without a difference is larping. Stop doing that.

            >we can't fricking know. It's an admission of ignorance.

            >So which is it?
            >Because we can't fricking know
            This one.
            >So which one is it? Do we know or not know?
            Within the scope of the term qualia we do.
            >Qualia is a noun. Nouns refer to things.
            Yes, the thing being the instance of mind as a subjective entity.
            >Defining nouns as statements make no linguistic sense
            You need to make a statement to define anything which is what communicates meaning. So the notion of
            >Nouns cannot have statements as meanings.
            is moronic. You can't have meaning without a statement and without meaning a noun doesn't exist.
            >which is completely meaningless.
            An ability to abstract is important. If you run your fingers through your hair (assuming not bald) is that experience not a property of consciousness is subjective tm?

            >Within the scope of the term qualia we do.
            >the thing being the instance of mind as a subjective entity.
            > If you run your fingers through your hair (assuming not bald) is that experience not a property of consciousness is subjective tm?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not a single coherent definition in the form of
            >qualia is a _____ such that _____
            has been found. Just a bunch of schizo babble.
            >hurr durr qualia is a FACT that...
            No, it isn't, you moron. It's a word that, according to you, means something akin to consciousness, but not really. DEFINE IT.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Okay, I am bored of this now. You have been filtered or are pretending to be moronic. Congratulations, or sorry that happened.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >still unable to provide a coherent definition of "qualia"
            Feel free to stop posting, you're obviously a pseud incapable of serious discourse.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >

            >provide us with a common ground we can start with


            My contention is the common ground is out of your depth because what you're asking for is already in this thread.
            [...]
            >used to describe the FACT that your experience (the conscious state of 5 senses available to humans communicating with a brain that create a coherent experience where the observer is (You) is SUBJECTIVE
            [...]
            > I can demonstrate qualia is a term that describes the state of consciousness as subjective because it's the definition of a term
            [...]
            >we can't fricking know. It's an admission of ignorance.
            [...]
            >Within the scope of the term qualia we do.
            >the thing being the instance of mind as a subjective entity.
            > If you run your fingers through your hair (assuming not bald) is that experience not a property of consciousness is subjective tm?
            >Not a single coherent definition in the form of
            is a _____ such that _____
            >has been found. Just a bunch of schizo babble.
            >>hurr durr qualia is a FACT that...
            >No, it isn't, you moron. It's a word that, according to you, means something akin to consciousness, but not really. DEFINE IT.
            BASED qualia is peak bullshit.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >The statement "1+1=2" can be explained in millions of ways
        So many ways that you cannot give a single example.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          1. Imagine you have one apple in your hand, and then someone gives you another apple. Now, you have two apples in total. That's what "1+1=2" means - combining one apple with another gives you a total of two apples.

          2. Consider a scenario where you have one toy car, and your friend brings another toy car. Now, you have two toy cars in total. This illustrates the concept that when you add one toy car to another, you end up with two toy cars, which is represented by "1+1=2".

          3. Picture a situation where you have one dollar bill in your wallet, and then you receive another dollar bill as a gift. Now, you have two dollar bills in total. This demonstrates that adding one dollar to another dollar results in a total of two dollars, which is represented by "1+1=2".

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Same shit 3 times. Also wrong and bad.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Nice move of the goalpost, Black person. You asked for AN example.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Then why give 3? Compensating?

            I’m not actually that other guy and I don’t care, don’t reply sorry.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why not?
            And yeah go frick yourself I'll reply to whoever I want.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            But I don't have an apple.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't give a frick about what you have.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Well said.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >There are some things that cannot be reduced.
      Is there something that is not qualia?

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    we are actually at the phase where npcs are arguing against qualia. Lmao. It's like the people who can't see apples in their mind can't even see apples in front of them.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's literally just a fancy word for consciousness used by pseuds who want to seduce astrology chicks.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Consciousness does not exist.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      What is this guy's actual position?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I don't know. But I measured his momentum.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          gek

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Conciusness is quality, I highly doubt you understand it, however you should probably consider ending your life.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    OP has been doing his moronic repetitive trolling for 7 hours straight. Way to spend your Sunday, dipshit.

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Qualia is a semantic problem that is irrelevant to meaning beyond the inanities of verbal Black folk. If this upsets you then consider yourself a vigger.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Qualia is literally the opposite of a semantic problem. Its difficulties come from the inability to process consciousness into language.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        “Qualia” turns into a semantic problem the moment literalists bsod their minds comprehending it, such as yourself. This is why qualia in any form of conversation suffers and becomes non-conversation, viggers cannot escape the bound of semantics.

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    red is red for most people. we should also be able to qualia new colors

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >virtual particle

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >thinks about it
    Wow smelly hippy man Im sorry youre not even vaccinated, trans, or israeli how the FRICK can I take you seriously?!

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Also wrong and bad
    False.
    >Same shit 3 times
    Also false.

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    you know what it's like having a computer or not. you know what it's like having consciousness. but you have no experience of non-consciousness. since the consciousness itself is what allows you to be aware of it. you can't be aware of not being conscious

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Are serious druggies of the pot and acid class peaceful people?
    I mean, do they share everything freely at least among themselves, and dont feel envy or jealously?

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If we get rid of all banks, nobody will cook acid for you, because you need erlenmeyer for that.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *