Consciousness is an illusion which can be explained through brain processes. Soul or the mind is just a complex sequence of electrochemical reactions. There is nothing divine or immaterial about our experiences, sensations, feelings or thoughts. Free will does not exist, every decission you take is actually the unavoidable consequence of previous mind states and memories, external stimuli and genetic coding. Hard determinism is the truth.
Do you agree?
if we could be philosophical zombies, then why aren't we?
Yes and?
What is illusion?
Your mom is an illusion which can be explained through brain processes. Soul or the mind is just a complex sequence of electrochemical reactions. There is nothing divine or immaterial about our experiences, sensations, feelings or thoughts. Free will does not exist, every decission you take is actually the unavoidable consequence of previous mind states and memories, external stimuli and genetic coding. Hard determinism is the truth.
Do you agree, faggot?
Also
>decission
>mfw
An apparent model of the real thing which erroneous as it does not correspond to it.
Consciousness is nature seeking herself. The more voluminous consciousness you have, the closer you are to the truth. And so the cycle starts anew.
So percieved phenomena cannot be an illusion because models are based on them, not the other way around?
People who cannot alter their desires are the most ardent in the denial of free will. Yet those who have overcame these are the first to say free will exists. Ironic, no?
>Do you agree?
absolutely 100%
it's very telling that christcucks are continually falling back on more and more ancient sources, digging up guys like Aristotle (hylemorphic ontology and all), as modern science advances and proves more definitively that all these old superstitions are happily explicable by naturalistic models.
ultimately, religion and ideas like free will or immortal souls are nothing but the high watermark of human vanity that seeks to anthropomorphize existence.
read pic related btw
>Consciousness is nature seeking herself.
Define seeking in this context
Didnt read your gay post because it was a word salad produced by the delusions of a pathetic wh*Te dog.
No.
Even the alteration of your desires by means of thinking is already determined.
Cringe.
>Didnt read
>Because it was...
How could you make an opinion on what it was without reading? Retard shitskin.
based
COngrats On undermining your reasoning faculties to the point that you should not believe in the validity of your own statements
Dont need to read something thats been posted a thousand times by teenagers and redditors. Curse of the high iq
>"I didn't read"
t. Yea Forums
of course
You faggots read wikipedia entries and whatever harold bloom put in his canon. Tell me, what books of value have you read this year?
Daniel Dennett believes in Free Will though
>Accepting determinism means destroying the validity of your ideas
Only brainlets seek validation from the delusion of being a god. You can't creating reality ex nihilo
Matter doesn't move itself. The wood doesn't turn itself into a bed and bronze doesn't turn itself into a statue. Both of these things require a craftsman but the craftsman can't explain his own motion since human beings go in and out of existence. Any attempt to explain motion will require something outside of matter. The reduction to more matter only begs the question and doesn't explain anything.
I wouldn’t say I disagree, but I’d say we’re far from knowing for sure
There have been great discoveries in neuroscience in the last decade and the more we learn about the brain the more clear it is that our thoughts and feelings are phyiscal reactions.
None of neuroscience could even in principle tell us anything about the underlying reality of being, whether there is something immaterial or not. All you're doing reading your own metaphysical presuppositions into the neuroscience.
More like accepting evolutionary naturalism destroys the validity of your ideas. Also naturalism is the most classic example of ex nihilo
>The reduction to more matter only begs the question and doesn't explain anything.
>....therefore, god exists
Read picrel. it's essentially about how bronze statues (order) can spontaneously appear in a stream of chaos, and how such events are far more likely than you'd otherwise think. All you need is just matter moving at random, until suddenly a state appears for which convolutions are interesting.
You could argue that such occurrences on their own are divine, and indeed some mathematicians kinda stand in awe of how certain really hard problems of chaos theory map to our real world (zeta function, moonshine groups....)
I didn't say therefore God and I'm not talking about order. I'm talking about motion or change. Movement itself must be ultimately reducible to something immaterial.
Movement is passage of time, when reduced to most simplistic models - cellular automata - matter is the white/black dot on a grid. And time is one tick of the automaton which evolves the universe from previous state according to its rules.
Without time there's no movement, and not even chaos as such.
What the hell are you talking about? I said that something immaterial ultimately needs to explain motion and now you're talking about time and dots on a grid as if it's relevant. I hope you're not trying to say that the movement of matter doesn't need to be explained or we don't need to recourse to the immaterial just because something appears automatic to our senses because that's clearly circular and it also doesn't address the question because even if some matter moved automatically there's still some matter that doesn't and would thus be reduced to the immaterial.
Don’t even bother. These people only know how to speak in platitudes about metaphysics given from basic undergraduate physics courses. They use motion, time and space to circularly define each other with no problem. To them an explanation of how latter moves is sufficient to explaining the nature or motion itself. If they cannot grasp the basic distinction why bother ?
this.There's no response from Dennett's view and evolution is very good at not leaving superfluous traits in organisms.
based plantinga-ite
oh shit its that guy from /sci/!
>Dennett: So you see, consciousness is of course merely an illusion.
>Socrates: I see. But, simplify this for me, I do not understand. What do you mean by “illusion”?
>Dennett: Of course, good Socrates, an illusion is an appearance that is contrary to reality.
>Socrates: That is well, but I still desire clarification about “appearance.”
>Dennett: Appearance is how an object is perceived by an observer.
>Socrates: I understand. So, consciousness is an appearance perceived by an observer contrary to reality.
>Dennett: No, Socrates, that is not right. There is no observer to consciousness, as this would be another consciousness.
>Socrates: Then you contradict yourself, Dennett. For if consciousness be an illusion, there would yet be another consciousness observing this illusion, and how could this second awareness be unreal?
holy shit, behold the power of reductive naturalism
>time is time
Absolute pseud
super b and rp'd
dennett btfo
>new modern world view considers old bad
It just sounds like when the Christians discredited the pagans because they changed the marker from proof from intuition to the written source of the bible. The scientific world view that only accepts quantitative results is very limiting has lead to wide spreed disinformation through bias interpretation of numbers (look out how nutritional advice has changed in the last 30 years). For someone who discounts religious texts, you might like to know that the Vedas talk about the big bang thousands of years before science hypothesised it.
>the Vedas talk about the big bang thousands of years before science hypothesised it.
???
>there's still some matter that doesn't
All matters "moves automatically", shocking as it may seem to philosophers. We're not necessarily talking inertia here, but QM entropy.
Another victim to Socrates.
>Mental events? There are no mental events. You're just imagining them.
btfo
Eliminative materialism is a real dangerous scourge among STEMtards, and they're full steam ahead fiddling with our brains as we speak.
>high watermark of human vanity that seeks to anthropomorphize existence.
Fucking based, describes the religious disposition perfectly