>says God has the mental capacity of an animal. >beloved by religious people

>says God has the mental capacity of an animal
>beloved by religious people

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    there's an infinite number of modes, or modes are infinite, what do you want?

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Is this the moron who made the whirlpool metaphor or something?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >moron
      Stop it, you’ll make him cry.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    but he worked at CERN though. must be true

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I've read his thesis and it's cringe af. I already posted a lengthy refutation here but it turned out to be pearls before the swine. The puerile followers of his cult are too intellectually immature to argue on a factual or logical level.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Post it again

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      He already refuted himself by malding at being called silly

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      oh my, sounds like you have destroyed them with facts & logic

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >physicalism
    can't account for qualia
    >idealism
    can't account for the material world

    Dualism is the obvious answer. But for the last 100 years ACKadummia has conditioned its npc scholars into a violent kneejerk reaction denouncing dualism as soon as it's mentioned.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Based, anyone who doesn't believe in panpsychic dualism can suck my balls.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the material world isn't qualia because it just isn't ok?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        explain how the presence of a pattern of neuron activation (which is the stage where the material chain of events ends) *IS* the same as the impression of red, tasty, rough etc...

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Identities don't admit of explanation, so asking how it is that certain brain states are identical to certain mental states would just be an illegitimate question.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Identities don't admit of explanation
            Where did you hear that nonsense? Establishing the identity is its explanation. Otherwise all equations in science were just arbitrary claims that happen to work

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Where did you hear that nonsense?
            What I said is utterly uncontroversial in philosophy. You can't explain why a thing is identical to itself. That will just be explanatorily basic.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >You can't explain why a thing is identical to itself
            yes, but you would have to establish why things conventionally treated as different are in fact the same. Otherwise you could just stop at "everything is One (nature/universe/being...)" and dismiss any further investigations.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The justification is Occam's razor. Mind-brain identity theory is simpler than dualism, so unless you can show that dualism has some explanatory advantage over the identity theory, you ought to prefer the latter.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That would be valid if mind-brain actually established that identity, and not simply claimed it. It's applying Occams razor to a metaphysical opinion, not an explanation.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >It's applying Occams razor to a metaphysical opinion
            Which is perfectly reasonable. When doing philosophy, one tries to construct theories that best explain the data while minimizing one's theoretical commitments, and you pick the theory that best manages that tradeoff.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I watched this video recently and I'm curious what would you answer to that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rovWYKsqzm8
            Basically it says that if you consistently apply the Occam's razor you end up in Solipsism because it's simpler.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You see red. Does something cause this red? Why does this red consistently correlate with some other qualia? Kastrup doesn't want to answer these questions. He says "it just is, okay?"

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Dualism is inconceivable. Panpsychism is more plausible; experience is inherent in nature and you let go of the notion that physics is the ultimate answer to explaining all reality. why should it even be?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Dualism
      No. You're right that both are incomplete but dualism is even worse. You may be interested in Schelling.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        In what sense is dualism worse? And what is Schelling's opinion? I haven't read his work yet.

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