2d1f5d No.4365
So I'm a moral nihilist and atheist who believes in reductionist materialism.
Interested to see what the arguments against my positions are, so I'm looking for the common refutations against these positions, as well as general opinions and the like.
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4366
>Whataboutism
>Appeals to ignorance
>"Atomic theory? You can't know for sure that a collective unconscious doesn't 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.
2d1f5d No.4367
>>4366
So there's nothing then?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4374
>>4365
What is your reasoning for being a materialist?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4375
>>4374
By materialist I mean, I only believe that there is the material world and what makes it up.
This is because there is nothing else that we have found besides the material world and what makes it up.
I suppose this phrasing doesn't make me a materialist, per se? Because in theory something else could be found. But I do not currently believe or assume that such a thing will be found, so what I'm left with is materialism.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4376
>>4375
Would you say the material world is finite?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4377
>>4376
Finite but infinitely expanding, yes.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4378
>>4377
Sorry that's the only what we can observe. I should have said, no fucking clue, but probably finite if you're trying to make some argument.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4379
>>4376
But what about qualia? There are are more stars in No Man's Sky than in our universe, and no two experiences are the same.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4380
>>4378
Are you familiar with a priori vs a posteriori?
Of course you'd have no clue if you approach the question through the scientific method, it's an inferior level of understanding, the truth can only be found through logic because logic is truth.
The real question is this, is it logical for the entirety of existence to be finite?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4381
>>4380
Yes it's logical that the entirety of existence could be finite. I'd say that it's also logically possible for it to be infinite - but that may not actually be the case. I don't understand the infinite too well.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4382
>>4381
What were the steps that led to that conclusion?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4383
>>4382
It is logical to conceive of a finite universe, thus it is logically possible (but not demonstrated) that the universe is finite.
I guess this may not be proper reasoning, due to the fact it doesn't rule out any disproofs existing. But I'm not currently arguing that a universe is definitively true, merely that from my current knowledge and axioms, it's possible.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4405
>So I'm a moral nihilist and atheist who believes in reductionist materialism.
same here
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4407
Can you reduce the meaning of a joke to matter?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4408
>>4407
What he means is ideas occupy a place outside of atoms, like mathematics and its rules.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4409
>>4407
not op but i can do it by using brain imaging
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4411
>>4383
>It is logical to conceive of a finite universe,
why?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4413
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>4365
Watch vid related its the evolutionary argument against naturalism.
Only about 14 minutes.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4421
>>4413
If our beliefs are adapted to this universe, and the aliens' beliefs are adapted to it, then they would not be too dissimilar. Although it depends on what they researched and such.
At least it wasn't more will/consciousness shit.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4422
>>4421
>If our beliefs are adapted to this universe, and the aliens' beliefs are adapted to it, then they would not be too dissimilar.
[proof needed]
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4429
>>4421
The point of the argument is that only neurology with survival value is selected for, and the content of the beliefs produced by that neurology is irrelevant. As long as the behavioral outcome of my neurology is conducive to survival it does not matter what my subjective experience of belief is. This puts doubt on all of the naturalist's beliefs, but naturalism is one of those beliefs.
The point of the argument is not to say that naturalism is false, but that it cannot be rationally accepted.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4433
>>4413
>Forcing people to watch a 14 minute video instead of stating a point
>taking priests seriously
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4437
>>4429
> As long as the behavioral outcome of my neurology is conducive to survival it does not matter what my subjective experience of belief is
your mentality steers your behaviour
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4440
>>4422
Prove what? Prove that memes are subject to natural selection? A less accurate belief about the world is outcompeted by more accurate beliefs. This does not mean that we are in some sort of optimum now, but that we will adapt new knowledge as we discover it.
Since he uses the term "wrong," he probably doesn't mean that a wrong belief is less useful in prediction compared to another, but that there is some other kind of criteria that chooses whether a belief is right or wrong.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4441
>>4437
How can you know that if you can't even trust your neurology to produce true beliefs? On naturalism my beliefs are just epiphenomena produced as a byproduct of my neurology which is causing my behavior. The brain-state comes causally prior to belief, and produces belief and behavior at the same time. So how does subjective beliefs being true make any difference in the survival value of behavior?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4444
>>4440
>A less accurate belief about the world is outcompeted by more accurate beliefs
so why do we have so many religious ppl?
> The brain-state comes causally prior to belief, and produces belief and behavior at the same time.
how do you know it?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4472
>>4433
>"taking priests seriously"
>not knowing who Alvin Plantinga is
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4485
>>4365
What do you think when go through a city?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4847
I don't want to start a new thread, but what is the best philosophy book to deconvert someone from believing in God? I am thinking of Nietzsche, but it is difficult to choose one.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4849
>>4847
I want the opposite.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4850
>>4847
Nietzsche is THE pinnacle.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4854
>>4847
Nietzsche details why you should not do such a thing in his own books. Are you sure?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4857
>>4854
He criticized religion in several places, but I can't think of a book where he turns into Hitch. So how about Hume?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
2d1f5d No.4858
>>4857
>He criticized religion in several places
But he always noted that the rabble had to follow religion because it was good for them.
Like yeah he criticized many things but it wasn't always a "dump this" outright. Bad/Good things have a scale and religion isn't outright bad.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.