[removed]

So much of the AI discussion is wishful thinking. Or magical thinking to put it another way. Or poor thinking to put it yet another. It's not impossible that computers could be sentient, but an honest appraisal would have to say its more unlikely than likely. The brain is not a computer. Silicon is not carbon. Comparisons between consciousness and computing are metaphorical. It's an en vogue faith based belief without even the redeeming qualities of a belief in god.

There is nothing as stupid as very clever people.

bunch of nonsense

Schmitt would have a field day with this guy

At least in the sciences I'm familiar with, there's really no logical "proof" of things, just evidence that supports a theory -- for now. The stronger the evidence, the greater the confidence you can have in a theory. But that stops when good contradictory evidence appears. Then you need a better theory.

If you wish, think about the reasons why you think it's a good idea to accept reincarnation, or any belief, at face value. It might be a worthwhile exercise.

[deleted]

Agreed, that's why I used "approximately" - technically/tautologically, it changes to the degree that it changes, and that value is not known because there is no way to measure it accurately, so people tend to ~imagine a value (or, choose one from a wide variety of inaccurate representations) that aligns with their preconceived notions.

That's a hypothesis, for sure. I don't know of any empirical evidence to suggest that the size and shape of the distribution of racism within a given population necessarily stays invariant while the mean changes.

Freewill caused the downfall of humanity

   With a purpose and strong will one can move mountains and surpass all obstacles in life. Without a solid reason or inner knowing man crumbles at the realization of his own existence and begins to understand the grime reality that no matter what he acquires in the material whether that be fame, love or money he’ll never be able to lift the weight of his own mortality. Life is a wonderful gift with a nasty price…..death. All good things must come to an end and unfortunately if you’re reading this it’s too late to decline you’ve already accepted and must now embrace the harsh truth of knowing it’s all an illusion. We are like king midas except our golden touch was replaced with the curse of mortality and everything outside ourselves will eventually turn to dust and Unfortunately that’s the reality of life. 


The answer you’re looking for is simply life is irrational and the universe, god or whatever runs this place has no solid plan, has no reason, goal or task we just simply exist until we don’t and then it’s on to the next then the next then the next. Who knows how long we’ve been in this cycle. There is no justice your good deeds will go unrewarded and your bad deeds over looked. Shit just happens and that’s life. Proof? Look at jesus he was the model human being right and what was his fate oh yeah killed on the cross. thats proof being a team player only gets you killed. 



  Look at all the ppl who’ve ever been at the top and research how they got there. No where in history are the majority of leaders actually good ppl and most got to those ranks from lying, stealing or hell they just got lucky to be born in a family of that status. We all have that saint in our lives who’s done nothing but good in their life ofc they made mistakes but their good karma alone should’ve put them in a better predicament and we all know that old hag who’s been raising Cain since her first breath bringing nothing but more hell to an already hellish earth and yet she has her every want  handed to her on a silver plater by this god forsaken universe. 



 Bffr and get out of your moral compass. it means nothing and the world shows you that daily so if you’re gonna do something do it and have no regrets. Most new age spiritual groups love to say our ego aka our wants and desires blinds us from seeing reality and so once we stop wanting for anything thats when we'll receive everything It's contradicting bs but solitude allows you to see 3 ways to live life. One Believe there's something outside of you calling the shots and if you don't follow their rules you'll be punished and if you do you'll be blessed. Two you could live as a selfish fuck and go after everything you want and stop at nothing bc you're the creator of your own universe. It’s your movie and we’re all living in it so it doesn’t matter if the glass is half empty or half full all that matters is your perception and since you weren’t given a rule book to life you make your own rules and morals. This is a life I wish I could live but unfortunately I’m not talented and my hopes for thing’s getting better in life have died. the last way you could live is the mentally unstable route like moi and realize theres no point of starting anything of value bc its never gonna last so why put yourself through pain. To be or not be? I say most ppl would have to agree with my stance on not being bc like heart break once you feel the pain of betrayal no amount of love that person gave can ease the hurt they caused when they crossed you. Existence is a never ending video game where suffering will always be the main character which is why I choose to self destruct use anything to numb myself and currently My goal is to not be fazed by the bs life throws at me and to just keep swimming until my times up.  




 I'm tired of this emotional rollercoaster and if I don’t have a choice in the matter I want to at least be at peace. I can’t recommend my route either as im a hot mess as most of you can tell but what would remedy this would be will. unfortunately i wasn't blessed with the natural passion for life and the little hope I had is gone but if you have a talent or deep down you feel like you're meant to be doing something do it bc I wish I knew what I truly want. My dumbass still thinks there’s a little logic to the madness and when I have a little strength I spend my time trying to crack the code to this matrix so I can wake up from this terrible dream but I doubt that’s gonna happen for me anytime soon. But you yeah you. you’re here on earth I say if you have a dream do it make it worth dying for. pursue it with no regrets bc we’re all gonna die one day at least go out doing something you want. Yes jobs and life is a thing so ofc you can’t just drop everything and become a rockstar but that’s on you to figure out be happy you at least have some idea what you wanna do

I’m doing the “if you can’t explain yourself, you don’t know what you’re talking about”

but if you should treat it as being disproven until it's proven, what incentive is there for anyone to prove it

are you seriously doing the fallacy of "if you don't have a solution I'm right"

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Read the Post Before You Reply

>Read/watch/listen the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

[removed]

Enjoyment and happiness can absolutely be the same, just as much as they can be different.

> Ah, the author had some mystical idea of "happiness" in mind, then, which they have no doubt defined as excluding those things they think ought not to produce it.

Are you not kind of doing the same here, assuming that the author's take is necessarily wrong and yours is not?

>> Why does "evolutionary strategy" matter if the fundamental question is how to live one's life? Is parasitism a valid strategy to pursue one's own happiness or self-esteem?

> Sure?

What if it isn't actually though? Like, it may "work" (you do not literally die), but whether parasitism is optimal for the overall system or even yourself as an individual (if you consider things like systems theory, emergence, consciousness, etc) seems rather complicated.

> I mean, you only really get three basic roles to choose from - predator, prey, or parasite.

What about neutrality (which could be a blend of these, or something else)?

> Of course, the metaphor falls apart very quickly if you try to work with it, because the use of the term "parasite" wasn't exactly intellectually honest in the first place. It was just an emotionally loaded term meant to forestall debate.

a) That isn't the only reason it falls apart.

b) How do you know that "the term "parasite" wasn't exactly intellectually honest in the first place. It was just an emotionally loaded term meant to forestall debate", and that the phenomenon you mentioned isn't affecting you in your evaluation?

> I don't think any serious existentialist would suggest that everyone can just casually discard their lived experience. It's there, and it shapes identity. True, we have more choices about that than we are often led to believe, but it's not a binary

You can think of it as probability distributions across numerous variables, the population, and time. So in the case of racism (and various other -isms, experienced from a particular frame), as time progresses the whole distribution will retain approximately the same shape (reflecting the relative levels of the racism within the population) while the entire distribution can move towards less racism (absolute decrease in the aggregate).

I don’t believe you can square the use of parasite with a concern for that entity’s agency. It’s like trying to trust a person who says, “I don’t hate Jews because of their genetics; I call them rats because of the choices they’ve made.” Even if I grant that you don’t condemn people for being unproductive through no fault of their own, this parasite rhetoric still evokes imagery of hate toward desperate victims (like drug addicts and the mentally ill). It’s not like the people you’re calling parasites are benefiting from their behavior. They need rehabilitation and community more than condemnation.

> Lol, the mods here aren't decent people.

You managed to make that judgment in 15 hours?

"But it’s because the skeptic values reason as well, that they would have to have a justification to value their own freedom. They would have to have a non-arbitrary difference between their freedom and others’ freedom for them to justify valuing only their own."

By your own admission, it's not that it's impossible to value ones own freedom (which wouldn't even make sense because people clearly do that all the time), but that it would be arbitrary and thus irrational to do so, which brings us back to my question.

I think the thing here is that you believe extrinsic properties are irrational to value, but intrinsic ones are not, and I don't see a meaningful difference. Is this accurate?

I think the distinction is one of choice and the capacity to support oneself. If a person is capable of supporting themselves they'd have a moral responsibility to do so.

The article describes a dichotomy between those who are productive and parasites. If you think this author believes children with cancer and the disabled are productive, I have no idea how you came to that conclusion since the article seemed to only describe productivity in terms of being paid or maintaining self sufficiency. Why do you think this author would say a kid with a mortal case of cancer isn’t a parasite?

I think you're projecting a bit if you associate the word parasite with the disabled or children dying of cancer.

Stopped reading after the first use of parasite. Any philosophy which dehumanizes the disabled (and anyone else not productive under capitalism) doesn’t have much productive to say about morality. You look like a monster when you describe everyone from lovable puppies to children dying of cancer as parasites. There’s more to morality than greed.

[removed]