Mind body problem

[Socrates]

This is perhaps the most horrifying problem in philosophy, thinkers from Descartes and Newton to Nietzsche and Davidson have tackled this problem.

Some of the more wacky explanations are from Liebniz and Berkeley, although I have sympathy for Berkeley and Idealism as it solves the dualist problem of how mind and body interact by simply eradicating the body - but this is clearly counter-intuitive. Leibniz says mind and body never interact and are akin to two pendulums swinging in harmony (parallelism) which is absolute nonsense.

Newton at least gives us a view of the mind as though it is a force like gravity and so it can interact with matter, we just can't see it.

I personally, am a materialist and I think the mind is an illusion that is part of the physical system, I don't believe we have free will, but our experience and being is complex enough for me to think I have free will. This would also account for change and flux of my self. 

Other views are Occassionalism and Spinoza, who was a substance monist, all is God and we are modes of God/nature - a kind of panentheism, which I do have a soft spot for.

What do you guys think?

[thetrizzard]

Similarly I liked Spinoza's rejection of the dualism of the mind/body problem by stating that they were different attributes of the same substance, two ways of talking about the same thing...however, more modern thinkers that are noteworthy that I remember from my uni days are Gilbert Ryle and Peter Strawson - Ryle states that the distinction of mind/body rests on a 'category mistake' and Strawson stated that 'persons' are 'logically primitive' i.e. is prior to the notion of an individual consciousness or a body

[Socrates]

This looks good: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/philosophy/people/cassam/contemporary_reactions_to_descartes_philosophy_of_mind.doc

[Arkilogos]

As the universe is responsible for the composure of the body, it is reasonable that it also composes what we experience as the mind. When I look at DNA, I see an antenna that receives a universal signal.

[atreestump]

As the universe is responsible for the composure of the body, it is reasonable that it also composes what we experience as the mind. When I look at DNA, I see an antenna that receives a universal signal.


Could you elaborate on this?

[kFoyauextlH]

So interesting!

[Intellectus]

To question what we are is the answer to what is it to be human.

What are the odds in the vastness of space that this one planet (that we know of) created the evolution of Man to question Man?

A inconceivable blend of matter in chance.

[kFoyauextlH]

There is a lot of evidence building up, from even a story as old as the Iliad, that severely deformed people may be especially smart and funny, possibly because they have to be.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thersites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_dwarf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jester

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Comedy

https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog ... ical-humor

Unusual faces, or movements, or postures triggering laughter.

[kFoyauextlH]

This person had both a mind and body problem supposedly.

I guess the options are:

Is there a mind, is there a body, are there neither, are there both?



So, my funny philosophical choice since childhood has been denial/rejection of the idea of a ghost inside people, which is what many then turned into the mind of today. On the immediate level of things I only believe in the body without a ghost, and that cognition seems dependent on physical elements upholding and even surrounding it and it doesn't generate without those conditions or some kind of apparatuus, like a body that is doing the things that makes it occur.

I think that terms might be getting confused by people to, like brain, mind, soul, body, biology, whatever.

At the highest level, though it is apparent to me on the immediate level that everything seems physical, I believe in a bodiless super intelligence that is just that, which any experience that exists, exists in, and that this materialism and all body thing is an illusion, so I believe in both, all body, and no bodies, no mind, all mind. I both believe in the impression of what people usually think of as free will and the importance of having freedom and agency, and at the higher level that there really is no such thing as free will ever and that the super mind generating all experiences and realities we take to be firm and real are the "free will" of exclusively that, the only living thing with any free will to generate anything and it is beyond and before conditioning or influence and is not reacting to anything but generating it. I go further to deny any reality to one action influencing another, except that in the immediate reality that we all deal with, that is obviously the case.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/occasionalism/

https://iep.utm.edu/occasion/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occasionalism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_( ... hilosophy)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvaita_Vedanta

"
The Reals

This system admits of a two-fold classification of "Reals"- into the Independent and Dependent reality; the Independent Reality is One, and is Vishnu. The dependent reality comprises all else- the jivas, the jadas and also the abhava padarthas.

The Brahman

Brahman is Vishnu, He is Supreme, abode of auspicious attributes, free from blemishes, and Infinite in every sense of the term. There is no gradation of Brahman into Saguna and Nirguna; Nirguna is understood as being free from all kinds of imperfections and is itself a guna (attribute) of the Supreme.
"

"
The theory of five differences is that "the jiva is different from every other entity including all jivas".[23] These five differences are said to explain the nature of the universe. The world is called prapañca (pañca "five") by the Dvaita school for this reason.

Madhva differed significantly from traditional Hindu beliefs owing to his concept of eternal damnation. According to him, there are three different classes of souls: One class, Mukti-yogyas, which would qualify for liberation, another, the Nitya-samsarins, which would be subject to eternal rebirth or eternal transmigration and a third class, Tamo-yogyas, which would be condemned to eternal hell (Andhatamisra).[23]
"

Most of the time I and I assume we and all the people in my experience claiming to experience deal with the domino world of apparant actions and reactions, but I still believe that an experience can be effortlessly changed like a dream and that anything can happen in it or be right around an unseen corner, miracles and magic, even complete transformation, with or without explanation, suddenly experiencing something entirely different, and so things like synchronicity become less impressive in some ways if such is true, as the impression of things being amazingly coordinated can be presented instantaneously in a moment or frame of experience that was just generated with no real past to it, the past to it being part of the story in that generated moment.









Funny that he is abusing a digital horse while talking about Nietzche who is associated with a famous horse scene for his climax and crescendo into finally being acknowledged as having lost his mind.

















Money in the dream is all that gives anything meaning, empty numbers.

https://iep.utm.edu/nihilism/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism





This is sick:



They want to normalize this to rig people with harnesses they can suddenly turn off leaving them weaker than ever or use to trick them into thinking they are in control of their complete state of slavery. The ones obsessed with evil stuff like this are the ones who have been spending billions studying this junk and are in charge of so many of the tech companies making these things. Her mission is to try to normalize it and make it appealing to the future slaves.





This game is about simulation and cognition and "eternal return" and cycles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_return

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gay_Science

"
Eternal recurrence
edit

The book contains Nietzsche's first consideration of the idea of the eternal recurrence, a concept which would become critical in his next work Thus Spoke Zarathustra and underpins much of the later works.[3]

What if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: 'This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more' ... Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: 'You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine.'[4]

"God is dead"
edit

The book mentions an occurrence of the famous formulation "God is dead"; this can be found in later works such as Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

After Buddha was dead, people
showed his shadow for centuries afterwards in a
cave,—an immense frightful shadow. God is dead:
but as the human race is constituted, there will
perhaps be caves for millenniums yet, in which
people will show his shadow.—And we—we have
still to overcome his shadow![5]

Section 125 depicts The Parable of the Madman who is searching for God. He accuses us all of being the murderers of God. "'Where is God?' he cried; 'I will tell you. We have killed him—you and I. All of us are his murderers..."[6]
"

Oops, looks like the evil bastards got me:

https://i.postimg.cc/KY490P97/1000145861.png

I've been kicked off of reality!

[kFoyauextlH]

My apologies, I thought it was a little humirous, albeit depressing, in relation to the title.