Philosophy in The Second Apocalypse

  • 47 Replies
  • 11527 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #15 on: May 14, 2013, 08:32:29 pm »
Quote from: Bakker User
Quote
How are we defining 'physical' and 'non-physical' for the purposes of this discussion?

Good question, but not one I can satisfy.

Quote
Well if abstractions are not necessarily non-physical, then that is the same as saying that abstractions are not necessarily physical.

I don't see how that follows semantically. But if it helps, I'll take a more absolute stance. In "our universe" (as opposed to whatever potential universes we may describe, such as Earwa), if we're taking the position that there are no non-physical elements, then abstractions are always physical.

Quote
If you want an example, try 'mathematics'. Math isn't physical unless you write it down, but it still exists whether or not you do so.

Well, that's the point; math does not exist outside of humans, or perhaps other similar creatures. If there were no humans or other "sentient" organisms, the concept of mathematics would cease to exist. Ultimately, what math is is the set of protein molecules that represent it within the brain. And yes, if we're taking reading as another neurally represented event then having math "written down" wouldn't allow it to exist outside of humans - as soon as there are no humans to interpret the material, then it just becomes a bunch of meaningless squiggles anyway.

Quote
Asking the same question over and over won't get you a different answer unless you provide a more rigorous explanation of what you want.

Que?

Quote
So, by your own definition your question has already been answered.

It's not my question. I suppose this is what I get for not properly attributing quotes.  :oops:

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #16 on: May 14, 2013, 08:32:45 pm »
Quote from: Wilshire
Saying math doesn't exist when there are no more humans is like saying that if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, then it doesn't make a sound.

The tree does make a sound, math would still exist.

The interpreter does not create the reality, reality exists and is interpreted. Taking away observation does not take away the action (unless this is quantum physics and in which case sometimes it does, but lets ignore that).

I believe math still perfectly answers the question. Non-physical and existing.

By your definition, once all humans are gone, the universe ceases to exist since there is nothing to observe it. I would have to disagree with that, though I guess it would be hard to prove one way or another.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #17 on: May 14, 2013, 08:32:51 pm »
Quote from: Bakker User
Quote from: Wilshire
Saying math doesn't exist when there are no more humans is like saying that if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, then it doesn't make a sound.

Maybe, maybe not. It is however beside the point, as math is internal to humans while trees are external. That's my point - that math only exists within humans, so that once they are gone...

Quote
The interpreter does not create the reality, reality exists and is interpreted.

Maybe, maybe not.

Quote
I believe math still perfectly answers the question. Non-physical and existing.

How do you counter the claim that math only exists as proteins within brains?

Quote
By your definition, once all humans are gone, the universe ceases to exist since there is nothing to observe it.

See first line. If human beings no longer exist, would you say that human brains continue to exist? Because that's what you would be committing to, going off of my terms.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #18 on: May 14, 2013, 08:32:57 pm »
Quote from: Wilshire
Quote from: Bakker User
Quote from: Wilshire
Saying math doesn't exist when there are no more humans is like saying that if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, then it doesn't make a sound.

Maybe, maybe not. It is however beside the point, as math is internal to humans while trees are external. That's my point - that math only exists within humans, so that once they are gone...

Quote
The interpreter does not create the reality, reality exists and is interpreted.

Maybe, maybe not.

Quote
I believe math still perfectly answers the question. Non-physical and existing.

How do you counter the claim that math only exists as proteins within brains?

Quote
By your definition, once all humans are gone, the universe ceases to exist since there is nothing to observe it.
See first line. If human beings no longer exist, would you say that human brains continue to exist? Because that's what you would be committing to, going off of my terms.


Maybe, maybe not.
 8-)

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #19 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:02 pm »
Quote from: Bakker User
Now there's a good fellow!

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #20 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:07 pm »
Quote from: Callan S.
Quote from: Bakker User
What's physical and also exists?  ;)
Well, you stand in front of a Indiana Jones style boulders path as it rolls towards you and an escape route that involves breaking your leg from a fall. You can decide whether the boulder is physical and exists enough to break your leg leaping out of the way.

I'll face a boulder made of 'mathematics' 'rolling towards me' and a choice of breaking my leg to get out of the way. I'll tough it out.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #21 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:12 pm »
Quote from: Duskweaver
So, it seems like you're defining 'physical' as, roughly, 'an object possessing mass'?

Now, how are you defining 'exists'?

Because, entertaining as this thread has been, watching three people argue over whether non-physical things exist without a mutually-agreed definition of any of the discussion's basic terms is starting to look a lot like three old blind guys pawing at an increasingly-nervous elephant and arguing over what the fuck this big lump they've just stumbled into actually is. So I sort of feel a vague urge to try and assist before somebody gets trampled by 10,000lb of metaphorical pachyderm.

(Incidentally, I'd say all boulders are "made of mathematics". I'd certainly not be willing to stand in the path of one, trusting only in a faith that mere numbers can't hurt me...)

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #22 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:17 pm »
Quote from: Callan S.
It's weird how it conversation still makes itself go and turn around 'someones just decided on a definition'. Just stand in front of the boulder! The definition will come to you! Or perhaps more precisely, in avoiding the true definition, one will come to a perspectival definition. Such is lifes suspicion of death.

And kludging all boulders and maths together just ignores my proposition as it is. Conversations capacity to avoid real consequences has its benefits - but it also has its downside and this is one of them.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #23 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:22 pm »
Quote from: Duskweaver
I didn't understand a word of that. But it's been a horrible day, so the problem may be entirely on my end.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #24 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:27 pm »
Quote from: bbaztek
my original reasoning was that if it exists - even subjectively - then it can be measured. like literally a highdea started this

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #25 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:31 pm »
Quote from: lockesnow
Quote from: Wilshire
By your definition, once all humans are gone, the universe ceases to exist since there is nothing to observe it.

Jesus Christ, if you're going to spoil the ending of The Unholy Consult at least use the fucking spoiler tags you two!

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #26 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:36 pm »
Quote from: Callan S.
Or the observed universe ceases to exist.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #27 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:41 pm »
Quote from: Madness
Lol, everyone has a direct line to me whenever - though, obviously, my first suggestion will usually be putting the issue before the table. I'm hovering, even if I'm busy putting words elsewhere.

For my energy, I'd hazard picking battles ;).

For my contribution to the topic, for now, Ishual is the City in the Republic, Ajencis is Socrates, Plato, or Diogenes, Kellhus is Zarathustra?

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #28 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:46 pm »
Quote from: Auriga
Quote from: Madness
For my contribution to the topic, for now, Ishual is the City in the Republic, Ajencis is Socrates, Plato, or Diogenes, Kellhus is Zarathustra?
Ishušl doesn't remind me especially of Plato, no. And the equality-preaching Kellhus is hardly a Zarathustra (who was pretty clear that he's not the overman, just a preacher of that ideal). Ajencis is definitely Socrates, though.

The Gnostic Schools and their philosophy generally remind me of classical Platonism - all their ideas about "true meanings" (that all things are copies of transcendent ideas, which are the objects of true knowledge), the rigid perfectionism, the emphasis on pure reason, and so on. Makes sense as well, since the Nonmen and their human students are basically the "Ancient Greeks" of the Bakker-world.

The Anagogic Schools, especially the Scarlet Spires, tend to embody Hedonism. It's not just their nickname "the whores" and their sleazy greediness, but they're hedonists in the Epicurean sense (that the universe is entirely materialistic, and that pleasure is the highest good). They seem to have a general philosophy of "we're all damned in the afterlife, so carpe diem, motherfucker".

The Cishaurim are some sort of Eastern mysticists - the obvious closest parallel is Sufi Islam (this has a thread of its own, IIRC). Fittingly, they don't have the Mark because they're all about emotions rather than cold hard logic, much like Eastern "harmony-based" philosophies which don't actively fight against superstition and religion (which the Western, Faustian, logic-based philosophy does).

I think we've been over this before, but it's worth posting again.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #29 on: May 14, 2013, 08:33:52 pm »
Quote from: lockesnow
I had a post on naturphilosophie, which ought to be considered, if only because of their fondness for the term The Absolute, and because they were interested in unifying science and spiritual realms, since there were obviously spiritual components to what was an obviously intentional world. ;)  Naturally, the naturphilosophen lost out academically and scientifically to the disenchanted world folk.

http://secondapocalypse.forumer.com/the-self-moving-soul-the-absolute-and-naturphilosophie-t1246586.html