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.