Truth?

Posted in fuckphilosophy, intoxicated on June 21st, 2010 by admin

Our consciousness is constituted by sense impressions that are put together by our brain somehow (Kantian “categories” or whatever – I don’t *actually* see the computer in front of me).

Our concepts/images/ideas have features/details that we have inherited/learned through a continuous lineage that reaches back into the unknown dark (experiences/events in the past that are gone; there was no documentary crew there to record it). All we have is this idea.

This is similar to our relation to the evolved structure of our brains.

So…what do we know?

p.s. Wait, not just “sense impressions”, but also: emotions, memories, imagination, visions, etc.

Email to an academic philosopher friend of mine

Posted in fuckphilosophy, intoxicated, kinda philosophical on June 19th, 2010 by admin

Implicit to everything I was saying was that a re-enchantment of the world is in order. Look at all the students you taught here at [insert institution of higher learning]: they called themselves ‘Christian’ (which is supposed to be a “spiritual” tradition), but how spiritual are they? *Maybe* they pray, but I’m guessing that (if they do) it is more like begging. Here is the question: would you rather just watch the movie, or play a role in the outcome of the movie? You know this difference; we have talked about it before. I’m saying, fuck all this “so-and-so said such-and-such and they are wrong because…”…whatever. Look at all the confused fucked-up people! I’ve met them. I was out with them the other night! The world is fucked-up dude. You know this shit dude.

The philosophy that is done today is not going to save the world. At best, it is going to be forgotten for millenia, and some day someone will say, “oh shit, those old dudes knew what they were talking about!”, and then they can cite it as support for something. More likely, the centuries and centuries of philosophy will be too much for any generation of graduate student to study, and the same shit will be re-hashed again and again, and it will be re-discovered again and again. That is what we do now. And who reads it?…academic philosophers.
What was it that you found someone saying? Badass philosophy and pussy-ass philosophy? The only philosophy that will make a difference is the “badass” variety.
What is it that philosophers are looking for? Truth? HAHAHAHHAHAHHAAAAAAAAAAAA! Science is pragmatic at best. Philosophy should be mysticism like it used to be, then it might have some impact.
(comment on the previous email)
You may take issue with my statement about all the ‘”fucked-up people”. I’m serious dude. Don’t get too far up that ivory tower. Most (MOST) people are FUCKED-UP CONFUSED: hedonistic, enjoy it while we can, screw as many people as we can, who gives a shit whether we are remembered, whether we live an Aristotelian eudaimonistic life, where our life is remembered as an exemplar of a life well-lived. How many people live like this?…really… What kind of role model does the life of your average academic philosopher serve? Here is model that the life of the average academic philosopher portrays: how to be a cloistered dork (this is CERTAINLY not an attack on you personally).

Academic philosophers have left the people behind in search of… I don’t know.
Implicit to everything I was saying was that a re-enchantment of the world is in order. Look at all the students you taught here at GSU: they called themselves ‘Christian’ (which is supposed to be a “spiritual” tradition), but how spiritual are they? *Maybe* they pray, but I’m guessing that (if they do) it is more like begging. Here is the question: would you rather just watch the movie, or play a role in the outcome of the movie? You know this difference; we have talked about it before. I’m saying, fuck all this “so-and-so said such-and-such and they are wrong because…”…whatever. Look at all the confused fucked-up people! I’ve met them. I was out with them the other night! The world is fucked-up dude. You know this shit dude.
The philosophy that is done today is not going to save the world. At best, it is going to be forgotten for millenia, and some day someone will say, “oh shit, those old dudes knew what they were talking about!”, and then they can cite it as support for something. More likely, the centuries and centuries of philosophy will be too much for any generation of graduate student to study, and the same shit will be re-hashed again and again, and it will be re-discovered again and again. That is what we do now. And who reads it?…academic philosophers.
What was it that you found someone saying? Badass philosophy and pussy-ass philosophy? The only philosophy that will make a difference is the “badass” variety.
What is it that philosophers are looking for? Truth? HAHAHAHHAHAHHAAAAAAAAAAAA! Science is pragmatic at best. Philosophy should be mysticism like it used to be, then it might have some impact.

Addiction, the Sorites Paradox and Rationality

Posted in intoxicated, wasted on coffee on June 15th, 2010 by admin
There is an essential similarity between addiction (esp. quitting) and sorites paradoxes: What difference does one more cigarette/margarita/pebble/hair/etc. make?
First of all: sorites paradoxes (or ‘the paradox of the heap’). 1,000 pebbles together certainly constitutes a heap. 3 pebbles certainly doesn’t. What about 999 pebbles? Yes. 998? Yes. The question is: Where is the line? Is there a line where the collection of pebbles is no longer a heap? It seems not.
The same pattern is found in the reasoning of the addict who wants to quit: I’ll buy one more pack…What difference will one more day of smoking make? (I’ll quit tomorrow.)
The pattern should be clear, but what does it say? I’m not sure yet, but it says a lot.
The answer is to come.

There is an essential similarity between addiction (esp. quitting) and sorites paradoxes: What difference does one more cigarette/margarita/pebble/hair/etc. make?

First of all: sorites paradoxes (or ‘the paradox of the heap’). 1,000 pebbles together certainly constitutes a heap. 3 pebbles certainly doesn’t. What about 999 pebbles? Yes. 998? Yes. The question is: Where is the line? Is there a line where the collection of pebbles is no longer a heap? It seems not.

The same pattern is found in the reasoning of the addict who wants to quit: I’ll buy one more pack…What difference will one more day of smoking make? (I’ll quit tomorrow.)

The pattern should be clear, but what does it say? I’m not sure yet, but it says a lot.

The answer is to come.

Is everything a priori?

Posted in epistemology, fuckphilosophy, intoxicated, kinda philosophical on April 11th, 2010 by admin

If the laws of nature are mathematical laws and regular in some way (as in either they don’t change or they change regularly), then does it follow that in such a universe everything that is ultimately knowable is knowable a priori?

If anything is a priori, then mathematics is. In a consistent mathematics, all well-formed formulas (and more?) are true statements (in that system at least). And if we have decided that nature is describable by math, then it would seem like ultimately all truths about nature are knowable a priori. That follows right?

On Wendy Carlos

Posted in intoxicated on April 11th, 2010 by admin

If I could meet anyone living, near the top of my list would be Wendy Carlos…and then I’d at least try to put the moves on her, but only after worshiping everything (that I’m aware of) that she’s done.

I have a hard-on for Wendy Carlos

Posted in intoxicated on April 11th, 2010 by admin

My favorite movie of all time is Tron (see my Tron blog). The music is of course absolutely incredible. I have recently been turned on to ambient electronic music, and am currently listening to Sonic Seasonings (1972) and…

I just wanted the entire world to know that.

The Deontological Part Of The Brain

Posted in intoxicated, kinda philosophical on April 6th, 2010 by admin

Check this out. Now we can test for ’serial killer’.

Fuckphilosophy is back

Posted in Uncategorized, intoxicated, kinda philosophical on April 6th, 2010 by admin

All of us here at fuckphilosopy.com have been busy, and i’ve been busy raging against the people immediately around me for the last 6+ months, then i realized that the people around aren’t anywhere near as bad as most people, so i decided that i would start raging on the internet. i’m going to fuck the philosophical shit out of all y’all

The Year of Skankiness

Posted in Uncategorized, intoxicated, not philosophy on February 14th, 2009 by admin

This post is over a month old – something I started, but never finished, but here it is:

Take a look out the window. Doesn’t it look a little skankier than it did before? I’m talking general skankiness, and not any bullshit gender specific variety. For example, I just got home from vacation and there was a skanky blanket on my doorstep. It probably didn’t help that I got some smoked salmon for Christmas, and that was all I had to eat when I got back from the airport. But still, I’ve never gotten smoked salmon for Christmas before, so it still supports my point. Also, after I got back from vacation it was really humid and warm, so humid that it was beaded up and running down every surface around. Sweaty skank. Also, suddenly my jeans that I hadn’t washed for months since I bought them started smelling like mildew, and I can’t get rid of it.

Parallel to entropy (or perhaps identical with entropy) is an increase in skankiness. Look at movies from the 50’s or something compared to movies today.  Clearly an increase in skankiness. Actually, on second thought, there must be cycles of skankiness. Cave men were probably pretty skanky. The primordeal soup had to be pretty skanky, but before the primordeal soup, the water probably wasn’t very skanky. The heat death of the universe doesn’t sound very skanky, but some time after the Big Bang, when all kinds of shit is going down like physical laws separating out, and unfathomable forces, atomic particles fused together, etc. that all sounds pretty skanky. The weather has been doing some skanky stuff in recent years you’d have to admit, but an ice age certainly isn’t skanky.

My impression has been that 2009 is pretty skanky. I would welcome any other confimatory evidence from my readership.

Urinal Design

Posted in intoxicated on November 16th, 2008 by admin

I have questions about the standard urinal design. They’re all pretty much the same. Here is the question: Where should I be pissing? Where should I aim? This is actually an honest question. Just because the word ‘fuck’ is in the name, doesn’t mean we’re not serious here at fuckphilosophy.com. 

Here is a description of the urinal: There is this large wall that curves out on each side. So one option is to blast straight into the wall. The problem is this: Try this in shorts. If you have hairly legs like a man (like me) your hair will ring like antenna as thousands and thousands of piss mist coat your leg hair. I don’t like the idea of all this mist to be getting all over my pants. So, I don’t think that the wall is meant to pissed straight into. 

Sometimes there is a blue disc in a little plastic cage, or other kinds of mats and shit. I used to think these cages and shit were a good thing to piss at, because you weren’t just plowing straing into a wall, but it would all get caught up in the cage and there would be no mist. But then the other day I went back to my office desk and looked down and noticed a bunch of blue shit on my pants. Chunks of that blue disk were splattered all over my pants. So, now I’m not so hot on my piss-on-the-cage technique.

At the bottom of the urinal there is often a little pool. I don’t think most people piss into the pool. I’m pretty sure I’ve paid attention to whether other people were pissing into the pool. Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s what it seems like. Anyways, I’m pretty sure the pool has the same mist problem.

The technique that I currently think is the best is to try to find a surface that you can get a really low angle at. By “low” angle, I mean pissing at the surface at as close to parallel to the surface as you can. I’m not so tall, so sometimes I stand on my tiptoes so that I have a little more height on the wall. My theory is that if you get a really low angle on it, the surface will just catch it all, no spray. It would be the difference between snowboarding on a halfpipe and landing on the flat surface at the top, or coming right back down into the halfpipe again.

Also, that weird jaw that comes out at the bottom that has the pool in it? The only thing I can think is that that jaw is there to catch drips.

There ya go – my collected wisdom on using urinals.

Oh yeah, I don’t know how we came up with this urinal design, but it could be improved upon. I’ve got some plans drawn up. Contact me.