Author Topic: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)  (Read 86234 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Josasa

  • Commando Soldier
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #330 on: June 07, 2011, 04:38:04 pm »
Quantum Conscious

Quantum doesn't mean "magic." I'm serious: Stop believing this.


PROTIP: When someone invokes "Quantum" to explain something happening in the human body it's safe to stop listening to them.

When did I say that it involves "magic?"

PROTIP: When someone claims to have a complete understanding of something, it's safe to stop listening to them.

While you didn't necessarily make any such claim, there is no end in sight when it comes to quantum mechanics, quantum physics, or whatever you wish to call it. In fact, we have only very recently been able to make any headway in that field of science. There are still many possibilities out there.

But when considering magic...

ARTHUR C. CLARKE PROTIP: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

I'd also like to point out that the buddhist explanation is completely at odds with modern physics, because it needs an entirely new set of physical prinicples to actually make sense.

Which is exactly the reason why I included "Quantum Consciousness" (notice, it is not just restricted to "Quantum") in my explanation.

Back to that thing with Quantum. Simply believing that Newtonian physics answers all the questions of the world is foolhardy. There are many cases where the laws and systems created at that time period are still in use today, but the only reason for that, is because we haven't come up with anything to prove it wrong, yet. I'm not specifically focusing on Newton and his time period, because the same also applies to Einstein and the physicists of that time period, it's just that a majority of current physics are based off of the laws that Newton developed, and that Einstein later tweaked (or changed altogether). I'm generalizing heavily here.

Offline munchkin5

  • Punch-Out Champ
  • *****
  • Posts: 3130
  • Gentlemen.
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #331 on: June 07, 2011, 05:07:11 pm »
I'm gonna go ahead and assume you don't have an explanation, as long as you're sticking to the defintion of consciousness described under the buddhism option:

Quote
a continuous stream of ever recurring phenomena, pinched like eddies into isolated minds

And you can't offer anything, other than some unknown under the label "Quantum".

Offline emmet

  • Street Fighter Champion
  • *****
  • Posts: 10618
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #332 on: June 07, 2011, 05:13:33 pm »
It's all well and good to accept that there are aspects of physics we still have no idea about.

However, it's "foolhardy" as you say, to start making assertions simply based on the fact that we're not sure. That's pretty much just taking stuff on faith.
No way dude, you're trolling me.

Offline /lurk

  • Dragon Warrior Slime
  • *****
  • Posts: 5202
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #333 on: June 07, 2011, 05:57:09 pm »
It's all well and good to accept that there are aspects of physics we still have no idea about.

Yeah, but quantum mechanics isn't that part.
Not a winner anymore.

Offline Josasa

  • Commando Soldier
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #334 on: June 07, 2011, 11:42:21 pm »
I'm gonna go ahead and assume you don't have an explanation, as long as you're sticking to the definition of consciousness described under the Buddhism option:

Quote
a continuous stream of ever recurring phenomena, pinched like eddies into isolated minds

And you can't offer anything, other than some unknown under the label "Quantum".

An explanation for what, exactly?

To be honest, the definition provided for the Buddhist explanation of consciousness was off the mark and unfair in its description. A more accurate definition is, of course, longer and falls under the category of dependent arising. This being a fundamental law for their belief system also happens to tie in a lot of their religious practices, but it accurately says their beliefs when it comes to consciousness.

It's all well and good to accept that there are aspects of physics we still have no idea about.

However, it's "foolhardy" as you say, to start making assertions simply based on the fact that we're not sure. That's pretty much just taking stuff on faith.

That's a good point. I guess the reason I chose that one was because at this point it looks like the best option, or at least the only option that has any chance of solving these current mysteries. I wouldn't call that faith, but an educated guess on the topic of which area of study is most likely to give us results on the idea of consciousness.

It's all well and good to accept that there are aspects of physics we still have no idea about.

Yeah, but quantum mechanics isn't that part.

What makes you so sure?

Offline munchkin5

  • Punch-Out Champ
  • *****
  • Posts: 3130
  • Gentlemen.
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #335 on: June 08, 2011, 03:55:21 am »
An explanation for what, exactly?

An explanation of your views on consciousness, and why you hold them...

To be honest, the definition provided for the Buddhist explanation of consciousness was off the mark and unfair in its description. A more accurate definition is, of course, longer and falls under the category of dependent arising. This being a fundamental law for their belief system also happens to tie in a lot of their religious practices, but it accurately says their beliefs when it comes to consciousness.

Despite that article being a lot of woo and nonsense, it doesn't actually say anything about consciousness.

This does have something to say about consciousness, but again it's just a lot of woo and nonsense.

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24440
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #336 on: June 08, 2011, 04:58:41 am »
Having looked at the conciousness brain thingy dingle again, the Quantum Conciousness option is still a bit wank, but I am inclined to agree with that its actually saying.

"Quantum Physics over Classical Physics can better explain it"

Well, yeah. Classical physics has a minimal bearing on the type of complex chemistry and electrical activity that goes on in the brain. Classical physics doesn't even explain things like how electrons move around in a chemical reaction, and living things are chock flippin full of complex chemical reactions.

So the option is factually correct, it just isn't actually a theory of conciousness :P
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline Cyst

  • Space Harrier
  • *****
  • Posts: 4092
  • V 3 $ T H 3 T I C /// 新鮮な盗まれたアート
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #337 on: June 08, 2011, 01:27:23 pm »


I dunno what that means.
DEATH TO DAESH! In solidarity with Rojava!
-----------
Oh come now, Lurk.

The internet is a magical place, where linguistic and dialectic possibilities are endless. Why not embrace those variations and see where they lead you.

Offline Josasa

  • Commando Soldier
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #338 on: June 08, 2011, 03:46:28 pm »
An explanation for what, exactly?

An explanation of your views on consciousness, and why you hold them...

You know Munchkin, the last couple of discussions that I've been in with you have been pretty ****ty. I don't know if you realize this, but your posts come off as arrogant, and you really don't add much to the discussion at all. Not only have I provided you with an explanation of my three choices, but you completely failed to provide an explanation of your choices at all.
I was split between functionalism and epiphenomenalism, eventually i went for the former.

Of the choices listed in that survey, functionalism is one of the few ideas that has been refuted with studies. The very fact that the mind exists and can alter the brain through neuroplasicity raises several problems in the core theories that represent functionalism.

I'm gonna go ahead and assume you don't have an explanation, as long as you're sticking to the defintion of consciousness described under the buddhism option:

I have provided you, in three different posts, my explanation. Your inability to read and your assumptions have not only made you look like an ass, but have also made an ass out of me by forcing me to spoon feed you this information as if you were a second grader. If you don't understand the post the first time, you should consider reading it a second time. If you don't understand it then, try it one more time (since the third time is the charm). If you still can't manage to grasp the contents of the post, maybe sit it out?

Now that that is out of the way:
To be honest, the definition provided for the Buddhist explanation of consciousness was off the mark and unfair in its description. A more accurate definition is, of course, longer and falls under the category of dependent arising. This being a fundamental law for their belief system also happens to tie in a lot of their religious practices, but it accurately says their beliefs when it comes to consciousness.

Despite that article being a lot of woo and nonsense, it doesn't actually say anything about consciousness.

This does have something to say about consciousness, but again it's just a lot of woo and nonsense.

Again, this may just be your inability to read (or lack of understanding) coming into play, but if you looked a little bit further into the article, you would realize it had many things to say about consciousness. One of the biggest things it states is that consciousness is derived from the senses, which actually has a lot more basis in science than many care to admit. The very act of perceiving and recognizing things (which happens thanks to our senses of sight, touch, smell, taste, and hear) can be considered the base of consciousness. That was stated in the article, along with a bunch of religious stuff, which I'm sure you didn't like based on your o-so-insightful post. Here is another article of Buddhist beliefs that specifically focus on consciousness, and it was actually a link on the first article I gave to you (it was right next to the word "consciousness," but I guess you just missed that when you didn't even read it). It goes on to explain consciousness a little bit further, but it also has more religious stuff, which will probably cause you to completely ignore it and call it woo and nonsense. Ignorance is bliss, ain't it?

Offline emmet

  • Street Fighter Champion
  • *****
  • Posts: 10618
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #339 on: June 08, 2011, 04:06:01 pm »
I refuse to accept that any religion has any bearing on the true nature of consciousness, and if it does, it's just luck.

Yep, straight-up refusing. No grey area.
No way dude, you're trolling me.

Offline Doctor Z

  • Space Harrier
  • *****
  • Posts: 4072
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #340 on: June 08, 2011, 04:17:40 pm »
If you're going to be a dick about it, grab some of those scientific studies you are talking about but forgot to link to, eh?

Offline Josasa

  • Commando Soldier
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #341 on: June 08, 2011, 04:29:23 pm »
I refuse to accept that any religion has any bearing on the true nature of consciousness, and if it does, it's just luck.

Yep, straight-up refusing. No grey area.

Normally I wouldn't say this, and I know that it probably sounds harsh, but the fact that you even stated something so blatantly I'm going to have to. That is a really stupid statement to make. Stupid because it is flat out ignorant. You have to remember that religion focuses on a variety of topics, not only on the afterlife and how you "get there." It questions how we (we being humanity) came to be, what the purpose of life is, and what life is altogether. From this, stems a plethora of other questions that religious figureheads, philosophers, and scientists have proceeded to analyze and provide theories in an attempt to provide an answer.

Remember that the original scientists were called "natural philosophers." These natural philosophers were attempting to answer questions and provide theories presented by the church and the classical philosophers such as Aristotle and Socrates. Now, if you can hold Aristotle and Socrates in such high regard, why do you completely ignore the ideas of Buddha and Confucious? Is it simply because they fall under the blanket term "religion?" These religious leaders used the same deductive reasoning that is esteemed of the classical philosophers. In fact, you could even argue that they were a helluva lot more successful because they have entire populations following their teachings. But I'm not trying to say that you should do the same, just that you should open your mind a little bit when it comes to these matters. Shunning these ideas makes you appear like some sort of religious fanatic who won't open his ears because it doesn't correspond with his system of beliefs.

That aside, what is your definition of religion?

Offline munchkin5

  • Punch-Out Champ
  • *****
  • Posts: 3130
  • Gentlemen.
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #342 on: June 08, 2011, 07:01:00 pm »
I'm gonna get back to this after I've slept. For now though I'd like to congratulate josasa on accusing me of be arrogant and an ass, and then going on to be and condescending and arrogant.

I don't want to get personal, I don't know why you had to start insulting me like that.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2011, 04:47:27 am by munchkin5 »

Offline Josasa

  • Commando Soldier
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #343 on: June 08, 2011, 08:14:26 pm »
I'm gonna get back to this after I've slept. For now though I'd like to congratulate josasa on accusing me of be arrogant and and ass and then going on to be and condescending and arrogant.

I don't want to get personal, I don't know why you had to start insulting me like that.

I do apologize, as I do not like ad hominem attacks. But in your case, you have consistently failed to read my posts or understand them. I have had to divert time and effort trying to explain my point whereas others have understood the message I was trying to illustrate. Not only did you not understand my points, but at the same time you were arrogant and brash, on multiple occasions. Not only is it annoying, but it is detrimental to the hopes of having a civil discussion. Please add something positive to the discussion, or, in lieu of that, actually back up statements in a creative manner.

Offline emmet

  • Street Fighter Champion
  • *****
  • Posts: 10618
    • View Profile
Re: What's Philosophy Do You Follow? (Quiz)
« Reply #344 on: June 09, 2011, 03:35:02 am »
I knew that would get to you Josasa. :P

I'd love to quote parts and argue them, but (a) I'm on a mobile device and (b) it'd just lead to more arguing.

If I accept anything as fact, it's (hopefully, anyway!) because I've been presented with adequate evidence or a sound argument. I said religion, not religious people. Religious people are perfectly capable of deductive reasoning and logical thought. I just have issue when they start talking about "the meaning of life" or "higher planes."

My definition of religion, and maybe this is naive, is the acceptance of the existence of something supernatural/paranormal on faith.
No way dude, you're trolling me.