[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]

/philosophy/ - Philosophy

Start with the Greeks

Catalog  Archive

Name
Email
Subject
REC
STOP
Comment *
File*
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive
Flag*
* = required field[▶Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webp,webm, mp4, mov, pdf
Max filesize is16 MB.
Max image dimensions are15000 x15000.
You may upload5 per post.

[ Literature ] [ E-books ] [ Politics ] [ Science ] [ Religion ]

File: 41d6c87698ddc35⋯.jpg (99.12 KB,426x568,3:4,Hitler_portrait_crop.jpg)

d8186d No.7493 [Open thread]

You may say this is better for /pol/, but I figure the subject is deep enough for presence on /philosophy/.

Exactly as the subject line says. There's a small cottage industry of discussion as to his religious views....but I've never been satisfied with the results.

He clearly had a strong enough metaphysical fervor that he can't be described as a simple atheist. At the same time, whatever some may say about his upbringing in a Catholic household, he clearly wasn't a Christian. Take any quotation you can from him which mentions "God", and you can easily substitute it with "Fate", "Providence", "Destiny", etc. For those who contend he was a Catholic zealot, he had astonishingly little to say about Christ ameliorating Original Sin or Mary being the Queen of Heaven.

Shit, for those who present the argument of the "Gott Mit Uns" motto on SS belts, I have (will post pic if you want) a "Second Reich" coin from 1907 with that same motto inscribed on the side. So the phrase clearly predates the NSDAP period and had currency by inertia.

One can also come across sources which attest that Hitler frowned upon Himmler's attempt at neo-paganism. Thus, deism is the only conclusion we are left with by process of elimination, and it's quite a reasonable one.

When we think of "deist", we probably think of Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, or other Enlightenment era figures. The M.O. of those thinkers was to observe the capacity of nature to carry out self-sustaining systems, as well as the capacity of people to carve out lives for themselves by innate talents of reasoning, so as to construe that a supreme creative force or governor intended for a universal order which could basically be described as classical liberalism.

Hitler similarly appealed to biology & history to demonstrate that there was an innate hierarchy of human races, with each one having a destiny as temporally erected by the time of its present circumstance.

The deist view is that there is a primary creative & intelligent input behind the Universe, but thaPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

f496bb No.7495

I find Perennialism superior to Deism..they at least know they are all connected anyways. Except talmudic judaism. They worship satan. I admire the Voluntaryist attitude of Deism but it never makes any sort of connections Perennialists do. If everyone follows a universal order and uses that, like say in Pascals Wager that they reason and live as if God existed, but that's a very agnostic system that has too much basis in gross materialism. The entire scientific method is why we have child trannies existing

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

388f8b No.7514

>>7493

Pantheist if you ask me...

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 10be3c417f6da35⋯.png (85.9 KB,758x379,2:1,leftypol.png)

406cf0 No.6748 [Open thread]

Why are the political boards here so shit? I get banned from /pol/ for anything I say, and the same applies to /leftypol/ too now.

In fact I get banned at pretty much every board here for just about anything. 8chan was supposed to be for free speech, but somehow it went to shit and is more restrictive than 4chan now. You can't even post about anime you like at /a/, or debate religion or literature on the relevant boards without hotpockets deleting your topic. This is the last board that could be good for arguing about ideas, if it weren't so dead. 8chan has become a major disappointment.

37 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

6ffa65 No.7182

>>7093

Libertarianism is just a extension of Jewish overreach, theft, is a natural Jewish impulse, whether it be rent money, usury, taxes or land that is not their own, the ideas of other countries (Machiavellianism being a prime example), and the ideas of Socialism (was presented in the middle ages before Marx, using guilds)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

97e997 No.7237

File: 8104034d2e73f85⋯.png (145.99 KB,500x512,125:128,ts-so-hard-to-be-an-alpha-….png)

File: cfffc33b5282230⋯.jpg (62.9 KB,749x500,749:500,2yylpv.jpg)

>>6748

Take the weeb-pill.

>Back in the day (circa 2012), the joke was that people pretend to be alphas on their keyboards, bragging of exploits that never happened, often followed by "Please buy my book and subscribe to my channel." I guess, back then people were in cope-mode, unaware of their real (abysmally low) value on the sexual market. Back in 2012-2013, people hoped that with just more reading PUA blogs and so on, they would get the girl. Well, now in 2019, they realize that it was a pipe-dream; it was over all along.

>So now, instead of bragging about all the sex you get on a regular basis with 10/10s, you brag about all the sex you can't get even with fugly post-wall landwhales. Seems that people always need to signal that they aren't low status, and since we all became realistic about our lack of sex life, we now accord each other pity-points (really, status-points) for how celibate we are.

>Someone needs to send a memo to the Feminists (Tumblrinas, Twitterinas, and Buzzfeederati) that we no longer pretend to be Chads, but rather, we now emphasize our sexual frustration for purely Machiavellian reasons.

https://weebs.is/threads/its-kinda-ironic.2679/

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

a4acca No.7504

lul

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

5a5732 No.7511

>>7237

What is this garbage. You shouldn't be ruled by your libido and you shouldn't be physically unfit; just those two things (libido controlled, physically fit) makes it possible to get laid. The point is that you shouldn't construct yourself just to be attractive, unless a lot of what is attractive is just objectively good/better than the alternative (looking healthy because you're healthy, looking fit/athletic because you are, looking confident/assertive because you are, et cetera). A lot of what is attractive to women is just masculine and better than the alternative, despite the work required -- and we're men, so masculine things naturally interest us (unless you're damaged or have a complex surrounding it, such as trying to emotionally shut yourself off instead of just developing masculine emotions > motives?).

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

5a5732 No.7512

/pol/ may not be coming back so you may get your wish.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 590ef8b62114338⋯.jpg (86.93 KB,1086x611,1086:611,Here it come homeboys!.jpg)

7dbb78 No.7122 [Open thread]

Sony Center in Toronto, on Friday, April 19.

Das it mane!

https://invidio.us/watch?v=Ij1J50nx9jY

No fireworks. Nevertheless, well worth a look.

15 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
Post last edited at

0cdf4a No.7240

A most satisfying engagement.

Initial impressions. Both Peterson and Žižek are accomplished in their mutual field, and their differing specialties. Žižek is, however, legendary, and for good reason. Naturally, this was viewed as a bit of a David versus Goliath match up.

Peterson was on the hunt for some blood sport with the topics of Marxism and postmodernism, but was taken off guard by his opponent's stance. Žižek is indeed an oddball Marxist to debate. Kudos to Žižek for employing his status to keep the audience in check, emphasizing to them the worthy seriousness of the subject matter over any potential to fall into a circus act. Both sides kept the discussion fairly down to Earth without going into full geek out mode. Both approached this professionally, in a lively manner, and acquitted themselves admirably. The moderator's summation was succinct: it should have gone on for another three hours. We need another match up!

This wasn't really an alt-right versus alt-left rumble. If you come at it expecting a meme war you will be disappointed. Otherwise, I think you will find their debate to be educational, exciting, and (philosophically speaking) thoroughly entertaining.

I may have more comments to come. I want a re-watch with proper note taking this time around, and dig up a written transcript if possible. I think we need a "Peterson resources" link to the board guide as well. I'm (BO here) open to suggestions.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
Post last edited at

947570 No.7250

I think Peterson was too caught off guard for this to have been fruitful. It was interesting, but they were too constrained by time. It felt like it was over before they could even dig into anything deep. They should arrange a place where they can talk for an entire day, 6+ hours or so, with breaks in between. Otherwise it's just not going to go anywhere since both like to get side-tracked.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

947570 No.7251

>>7250

I should say I'd like to see lengthier debates/talks in general, not just from those two. ~3 hours is just too short.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

0cdf4a No.7304

derp?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

0cdf4a No.7505

Most recent philosophically interesting event bump.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 8d79f07ec69eea6⋯.jpg (32.53 KB,612x408,3:2,istockphoto-1075576692-612….jpg)

3ef4ff No.7502 [Open thread]

this dump doesn't load anything of substance. I try more than a few lines and it freezes up. No better than twatter.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

3ef4ff No.7503

>Anything of substance

Sounds exactly right to me.

t.Autistic science men

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 1445718533545.png (547.6 KB,1600x900,16:9,augustine.png)

9d609a No.2230 [Open thread][Last50 Posts]

h-humour thread?

60 posts and 26 image replies omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9b96cd No.7203

>>4624

That's the poorest Nietzsche joke I've ever chuckled to.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

2c894f No.7215

>>2643

Wittgenstein was sort of a sperg I see

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

65bc5a No.7492

File: 31ddc7f6da15d62⋯.jpg (32.5 KB,791x394,791:394,1473441820470.jpg)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

2c894f No.7494

File: 3b2e405722cb64f⋯.jpg (61.79 KB,720x975,48:65,67462621_160606681734888_2….jpg)

This pic kind of cracked me up

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

937241 No.7501

Would actually love to see a breakdown of that meme

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 46a5b4da6be4127⋯.jpg (46.79 KB,780x438,130:73,46a5b4da6be4127bb3354e99f6….jpg)

e33c6d No.7258 [Open thread]

p->q t f n u

t t f u u

f n n n n

n t f u u

u t f u u

n for neither

u for undefined

Rate my truth table for how conditionals actually work (none of this "if the antecedent is false, then the conditional is true," nonsense)

7 posts omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

e2ebdc No.7451

>>7450

How do you figure quantum logic works with anything? Do you think it can be consistent with AI? (Also wats ur degree? )

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

ec7e0e No.7453

>>7451

I'm not well versed in the quantum logic debate, but many-valued logic is supposed to work better for quantum, since it looks like truth value indeterminacy (also relevant in the debate on vagueness) has a possible place in quantum. I know AI stuff less, sorry to say (just not my area of focus). I have a master's in philosophy, bachelor's was also in philosophy.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

e2ebdc No.7454

>>7453

Do you have a reading list for analytic philosophy or philosophy in general I can read?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

ec7e0e No.7456

>>7454

Not specifically for AI/quantum logic, but if you are interested in some logic stuff (like the earlier-mentioned indicative, causal, and counterfactual conditionals) you can find some stuff on SEP (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). When it comes to philosophy in general, it's not a bad idea to get some basic feel from a rough historical survey. At least know some basic Presocratics, Socrates/Plato/Aristotle, and the early moderns (Descartes to Kant). For analytic philosophy, area of interest will probably determine what things you'll want to prioritize reading, but a safe place to start analytic philosophy in general would be some of Frege's work ("Sense and Reference" would be ideal) and Russell's ("On Denoting" would be ideal) on descriptivism. I'd recommend reading those two articles at the very least.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

8259c7 No.7500

>>7446

What is well-known isn't relevant, nor is the possibility that the material conditional makes sense in some other paradigm. You glossed over the point of the OP entirely, sorry to say: to rate my truth table. You shouldn't make assumptions about people's intentions that aren't implicit, then pretend like your commentary is relevant still.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 00db7b55a94c3fe⋯.png (28.58 KB,300x250,6:5,y4aMkhxqxs-10.png)

29b38d No.6599 [Open thread]

>be me

>philosophy major

>sign up for metaphysics and epistemology this semester

>go to class expecting to learn about and read Hume Descartes Locke Kant Witt etc

>get syllabus, all of the readings are contemporary analytic philosophers working within Russell's paradigm

>both professors fellate Russell every class

I knew most philosophy departments in North America followed the analytic school, but not to this extent. I also thought we'd start with the Greeks, like everyone says, but were starting the contemporaries. Is this how it is everywhere? How should I approach this, this wasn't what I was expecting at all.

7 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

1518c6 No.7223

File: d07232e7a8fefdf⋯.jpg (81.76 KB,500x500,1:1,2twqy0.jpg)

File: 79eb41b2d6592d3⋯.jpg (130.56 KB,800x500,8:5,2sf3rz.jpg)

File: 042991b6eb7000a⋯.jpg (123.68 KB,800x500,8:5,i87yu7.jpg)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9c953b No.7448

>>6599

This is normal and fair, you should read older accounts on your own. Read Anthony Kenny's 4 part history of philosophy series and stop being a pseud

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

f813c9 No.7449

>>6599

You will read those guys in history of modern philosophy classes. Of course a class on metaphysics/epistemology will talk about the contemporary stuff, where else will they do that? That's why the contemporary stuff exists, to advance those fields, and that's why they get taught. Mind you I love the early moderns and I would love to go back to them for more epistemology/metaphysics in their style. But you will get taught contemporary stuff in those kinds of classes and you have to expect that from the start. Yes, this is how it is everywhere (in my experience). Do you know what topics you're studying?

>>6609

People make a lot of money and fame by peddling that sort of stuff to others like you and you think they're not telling you exactly what you want to hear?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

da29a4 No.7457

>>7449

>That's why the contemporary stuff exists, to advance those fields, and that's why they get taught

But philosophy hasn't been advanced appreciably since it was murdered and usurped during the scientific revolution, so that can't be the reason it gets taught.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

ad3eaa No.7496

>>7457

This. The scientific method treats everything based on a gay mathematical construct

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: ea97e37532aa203⋯.jpg (30.06 KB,554x554,1:1,1560472572298.jpg)

c6a628 No.7452 [Open thread]

The universe and everything in itself is my will.

1 post omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

20555f No.7466

Schopenhauer is decent. I'm a big Fichte and Schelling fan though if we're talking romantic period philosophers.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

4836c9 No.7467

>The universe and everything in itself is my will.

If you can't tell the difference between will and the universe, then how does one know either of them exist?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

70a8f3 No.7468

File: 579939abe117eda⋯.jpg (45.21 KB,396x396,1:1,c2872fd02cdb5ea00355e5ba97….jpg)

*Blocks your path*

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

5a1f3c No.7472

>>7452

Schopenhauer never said "the universe and everything in itself is MY will". The thing-in-itself is Will (note the capital W which express transcendence), then, logically, Will is the kernel of all beings; me and the universe share the same essence of the irrational Will-to-live. Will is not will.

>>7455

Never talk about what you don't know, that's an advice for life in general. Anyways, what OP said is incorrect.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

20555f No.7482

I just noticed something

Schopenhauer's ideology that talks about antinatalism in his "Studies In Pessimism" it kind of reeks of boomer autism and thinks future generations of people can't improve on anything

he also talks a lot about Sophistry when his ideas somewhat reek of it. but he's not as bad as some say he is

just constructive criticism

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: a6b587ef72b98a1⋯.jpg (906.07 KB,1210x1563,1210:1563,threeareone.jpg)

19a18f No.7342 [Open thread]

http://www.albumangelorum.com/english/philosophy

I think this list is almost complete.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9c8e3b No.7344

>most of my favorites fall under 'demon'

I feel personally attacked by this

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

c7cb4f No.7415

>most of my favorites fall under 'demon'

That's too bad... But some of the demons used to be my favorites too. The list changed everything.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

76266e No.7469

What is the assumption upon which you called some of the philosophers "angels", "demons" or "great"?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9c8e3b No.7470

>>7415

Doesn't change anything for me. Maybe you have a weak will

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9c8e3b No.7471

>>7470

Who's to say whose will is weak

<empirical charts, "muh research" , and such doesn't answer that question.

Use your third eye

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 485dfd281119b0b⋯.jpeg (25.54 KB,220x330,2:3,3893AB87-F2B2-4798-A624-5….jpeg)

128a0a No.7441 [Open thread]

I’ll start:

https://m.invidio.us/watch?v=gWWg6oiJjfw

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

270f60 No.7443

>2 views

>1 video

You could try not shilling your own shitty videos.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

a2dc68 No.7444

>>7441

joe rogan

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 761d0b6544e4f62⋯.jpeg (33.83 KB,738x416,369:208,images.jpeg)

695bad No.7436 [Open thread]

What exactly was the move from Verification to Confirmation in Philosophy of science? I ask this in the context of Scientific Realism.

It is Carnap who is usually credited for the shift.

If someone could explain this to me in simple terms, I'd be thankful.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

0e16b8 No.7442

Scientism with all due respect is just constructivism on a mass scale

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 97cc7b943550825⋯.jpg (6.39 KB,180x237,60:79,ludo3 (2).jpg)

a0216c No.7432 [Open thread]

He was atypical of most British philosophers then and now.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

8b044b No.7435

Who is that ?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

a0216c No.7440

>>7435

Anthony M. Ludovici

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 49eed776181aa3d⋯.png (43.58 KB,550x287,550:287,illusionism-free-will.png)

287aba No.7145 [Open thread]

1. Necessarily, if God foreknows that I will do X, then I will do X.

2. God foreknows that I will do X.

3. Necessarily, I will do X.

Is this accurate? because if it is, it's invalid. It would be valid if the consequent of premise 1 were "then necessarily I will do X," but why would it be? It's conceivable that were you not to do X, but instead Y, God's foreknowledge would simply have been different, such that Y would simply be the new X. Why is this not the case? Why do you have to do something simply because God knows you're going to do it? Why can't you just do whatever you want, freely, and God's foreknowledge not change -- but be -- accordingly? What could possess people that such a stupid line of thinking otherwise be so popular?.

13 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click [Open thread] to view. ____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

cce5d5 No.7325

God knows all possible outcomes of your free choice.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

f817c4 No.7364

File: ca4cf40b2fa29ce⋯.jpg (42.81 KB,456x468,38:39,9idfhdioifhdifjh.jpg)

the problem is pretty simple: if we stipulate God's omniscience to mean God satisfies all (supposedly) ideal epistemic conditions for knowledge (infallible, justified, reliable, true belief with respect to all propositions & their relata) then it follows necessarily if God knows you will x then it's true necessarily *that* you will x, which implies there's no possible world in which the agent has the capacity to x over y, and if we cache out free will contra-causally (the capacity to x over y in any possible world ceteris paribus), then by definition if God exists then free will cannot exist. and if free will exists then God cannot exist. the same problem applies to Gods agency himself.

one response is to adopt a compatibilist view of free will (freedom consists in the agents capacity sefl-regulate & self-determine their actions despite having no capacity to do otherwise - which is consistent with determinism). the problem with that in this context is the problem of source-hood. in what sense is the agent the source of his actions if God is the ultimate source of all creation & the metaphysics of source-hood itself? that implies (compatibilist) free will is only possible if God doesn't exist - if there is no metaphysical grounding to source-hood other than the agent themselves. in which case you get an intractible dilemma: either (compatibilist) free will exists which entails God's non-existence, or, (compatibilist) free will exists and God exists but God is causally impotent (epiphenomenal), but if God is epiphenomenal then God cannot create anything, but God is a creator by definition, therefore, via reductio to contradiction, God cannot exist. the same problem of source-hood applies to God himself only worse because you get a boot-strapping problem: God's source-hood would have to logically precede itself, which is incoherent.

another response would be to adopt theological determinism. problem here is determinism as a general thesis with respect to agency is incoherent because it implies an eliminative ontological reduction from agency to mechanism. basically, if determinism qua determinism is true, then agency is reducible to disposition (like a rock), which voids agency altogether. since agency is intrinsically 1st personal and disposions are intrisically 3rd personal there can't be any reductiPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

f817c4 No.7365

>>7364

finally, saying God knows all possible outcomes is useless. the argument explicitly accepts that per the definition of Gods omniscience. God knows all possible outcomes of all possible worlds which implies his knowledge of all outcomes in the actual world at which the agent actions x.

there's a shit son to be said about this problem and the shitty apologetics which go with it but i got bored half-way through typing this. did phil of religion zoinks ago. tl;dr whichever way you look at it g0d is dumdum ur al fagets red sum shit or kys

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/free-will-foreknowledge/

https://www.iep.utm.edu/omnisci/

https://philpapers.org/browse/divine-foreknowledge

https://philpapers.org/browse/philosophy-of-religion/

https://www.skepticink.com/humesapprentice/2013/04/02/proving-the-negative-a-list-of-arguments-for-atheism/

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularoutpost/2016/02/15/bibliography-on-arguments-for-atheism/

https://infidels.org/library/modern/nontheism/atheism/arguments.html

https://www.scribd.com/document/380702045/Handbook-of-Atheistic-ApologetiPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

7327e8 No.7368

>>7325

gott ist tott

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

1a30b4 No.7431

>>7145

That pic reminds me of part of the story What's expected of us by Ted Chiang

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 2d57d0068e6493d⋯.jpg (395.02 KB,1920x1440,4:3,5a9337ccb87f260001889402_i….jpg)

4c8ddf No.7417 [Open thread]

What literature might I read to explore how a view like infinitism is compatible with the existence of knowledge? Or a view that rejects foundationalism and coherentism and also explores just how it is that knowledge exists.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

a68f72 No.7426

I dunno, Jason Jorjani or Nick Land maybe?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.


File: 554591c3dbbd372⋯.jpg (69.3 KB,500x500,1:1,3d7829b37d8dd256edbe1c4a3f….jpg)

a1551c No.7404 [Open thread]

I had many near-death situations in my life, and many many problems, I wanna share the mindset that made me stronger and helped me to survive until now.

(This is the first and the last time im posting that).

1) The feeling, "Love to God" should be number one priority, forever. And it should be refreshed every day.

2) Never regret the past. (it was a lesson)

3) Never be afraid of the future.

4) Even your worst enemy is actually your teacher, and teacher is an ally. (helps you to become stronger)

5) Never blame your parents for your problems and failures.

6) Try to overcome the aggresion to the opposite sex. they are our allies too.

7) Try not to blame others, even if they are imperfect (just like all of us).

8) Never be a slave of religious organizations, because they use God for money.

Thats pretty much my experience, and Im glad to share it. I feel better somehow.

inb4 people saying kys

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Delete Post [ ]
[]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]
| Catalog | Nerve Center | Random
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / 93 / biohzrd / hkacade / hkpnd / tct / utd / uy / yebalnia ]