Panpsychism becoming a more relevant view

[Scholar]

Quite happy to see this. Rationalists being open to the idea of God and basically being correct about how to attain it. Alex O'Connor is quite a robust thinker, hopefully he will explore this path more deeply in the future.

[zurew]

It was an interesting discussion, I would love it very much if Dr K would engage with philosophy more deeply, because he could realize that some of the things are justifiable and rigorous arguments can be made for them.

He is well-versed when it comes to bringing up studies to justify his view on empirical grounds (like talking about mediation and the effects of it), but when it comes to justifying his philosophy he lacks a lot.

 

I would love to see a discussion between Dr K and John Vervaeke, cause John could do all the heavy lifting when it comes to philosophy and they could talk about meaning and purpose and the meaning crisis and meditation and awakening and intuition etc.

 

----

 

I dont want to derail but @Scholar whats your take on Alex changing from being vegan to being non-vegan?  His moral philosophy is the same, its just that he brought up the casual inefficacy objection (like one person being vegan wont change the meat industry and farming), which has very good responses (there are articles and books that respond to this kind of objection and explain why it worth it even for one person to change and they show it in tangible ways).

Edited Tuesday at 02:53 PM by zurew

[theoneandnone]

How could panpsychism be a more relevant view when this forum has had a solipsism jerk competition for the past 6 years and you think we can prove panpsychism LOL

[Scholar]

2 hours ago, zurew said:

It was an interesting discussion, I would love it very much if Dr K would engage with philosophy more deeply, because he could realize that some of the things are justifiable and rigorous arguments can be made for them.

He is well-versed when it comes to bringing up studies to justify his view on empirical grounds (like talking about mediation and the effects of it), but when it comes to justifying his philosophy he lacks a lot.

 

I would love to see a discussion between Dr K and John Vervaeke, cause John could do all the heavy lifting when it comes to philosophy and they could talk about meaning and purpose and the meaning crisis and meditation and awakening and intuition etc.

 

----

 

I dont want to derail but @Scholar whats your take on Alex changing from being vegan to being non-vegan?  His moral philosophy is the same, its just that he brought up the casual inefficacy objection (like one person being vegan wont change the meat industry and farming), which has very good responses (there are articles and books that respond to this kind of objection and explain why it worth it even for one person to change and they show it in tangible ways).

While he is a robust thinker, I also think there is a bit of flimsiness in his thinking. He generally goes in the right directions but often times doesn't account for deeper arguments. His stance on incest is similar, he will say that there basically are no rational objections but then maintains a stance that he believes it to be wrong due to being an emotivist (which has obvious counter-argument that he himself seems to have brought up, but doesn't connect quite right).

I think it was a bit self-serving from Alex to basically struggle with issues and then almost revert his position. He claimed factory farming is the greatest moral emergency of our time but ever since he ran into these issues he basically didn't talk about it anymore and went back to his atheism thing. 

I think he finds himself in a difficult situation given he struggles with his health and therefore sought arguments that would allow him to maintain a certain level of convenience without being considered morally wrong.

 

But yes, I think there generally is evidence that even a single individual not consuming animals will have a direct impact on how many animals will be killed/factory farmed throughout their lifetime.

Edited Tuesday at 05:38 PM by Scholar

[Salvijus]

I envy Alex's mind. It's pure art. 

Edited Tuesday at 06:01 PM by Salvijus

[Hojo]

I dont like that alex connor guy, hes a retarded intellectual. Hes not intelligent he memorized a bunch of philosophy and never actually did any.

Edited Tuesday at 06:07 PM by Hojo

[Arthogaan]

14 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

I envy Alex's mind. It's pure art. 

 

3 minutes ago, Hojo said:

Hes not intelligent he memorized a bunch of philosophy and never actually did any.

Those two comments being posted next to each other is a beautifull lesson on it's own. See how your Mind creates Beauty and Inteligence or lack thereof. You can program your mind to see more beauty and genuineness or you can program it to be more sceptical and distrusting. Both of users just saw pixels on the screen. 

[Salvijus]

33 minutes ago, Arthogaan said:

Those two comments being posted next to each other is a beautifull lesson on it's own.

It was a lesson in how defense mechanisms work if you ask me. People will see what's of value to them. 

Edited Tuesday at 06:45 PM by Salvijus

[Arthogaan]

2 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

It was a lesson in how defense mechanisms work if you ask me, lol. 

Yeah. And what is a defense mechanism if not imagining/creating reality to be a way that i am able to accept according to my survival agenda. 

[Salvijus]

14 minutes ago, Arthogaan said:

Yeah. And what is a defense mechanism if not imagining/creating reality to be a way that i am able to accept according to my survival agenda. 

Indeed. Not everything is a defense mechanism tho. Expressions of joy and appreciation for example are not survival based. 

Edited Tuesday at 07:01 PM by Salvijus

[Hojo]

Repeating philosophy textbooks isnt value. He dosent have an original belief. Hes more a philosophy teacher than a philosopher. While wearing the cloak of a philosopher.

Edited Tuesday at 07:05 PM by Hojo

[Salvijus]

3 minutes ago, Hojo said:

He dosent have an original belief.

Is that really the deepest reason why you don't like him to the point of calling him retarded? 

[Hojo]

@SalvijusGrift to feel like you hold the correct opinion. Its a textbook intelligent?

Edited Tuesday at 07:07 PM by Hojo

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Listened to this yesterday and didn't think to share it here - cheers 🙏 

I enjoyed it 

[Salvijus]

13 minutes ago, Hojo said:

@SalvijusGrift to feel like you hold the correct opinion. Its a textbook intelligent?

What if people are praising him for more than just his memory? Do you have a curiosity to see what others see in him, or do you prefer to reduce him into a grifter label and hold him there? 

Edited Tuesday at 07:20 PM by Salvijus

[Hojo]

@SalvijusSure tell me how his mind is a work of art. What makes it different from a philosophy teacher?

Imo learning about philosophy isn't philosophical. Like reading a math textbook isn't doing math. Hes the textbook not the actual thing. Just go read a textbook.

He also said he changed his views on conciousness but still dosent know if God exists. How? How can you change your views on God without even knowing what it is. 

Hes got delusion from AI cause he convinced it to say God is real.

The only time you should change your views on conciousness is if something mystical happens to you or else you are lying via logic and don't know what you are even talking about to change your view on.

Edited Tuesday at 07:37 PM by Hojo

[Salvijus]

51 minutes ago, Hojo said:

@SalvijusSure tell me how his mind is a work of art.

What I appreciate about him is difficult to put into words. It's a bit like trying to explain why a sunset looks beautiful to you. You just have to be subtle enough to experience it imo. But I will try anyways. 

The depth of his phylosophical inquiry. 

His ability to entertain many different. contradictory views at once. 

Intellectual honesty. 

Genuine curiosity and willingness to listen to opposing view. 

Moatly bias free. 

He's not emotionally reactive to other people's provocative attacks on his ideas when debating. Really high EQ. And his responses are so sharp and fast and straight to the point... His mental CPU is off the chart, meaning that his ability to process information, synthesize ideas, find loopholes in another person's view and responding thoughtfully and creatively in real-time is just incredible and awe inspiring. 

And there is more about him that I just can't put into words. His vibe is so pure. Such a beautiful soul idk. He's just oozing with intelligence of the mind. Everything he says sounds like a poetry somehow. 

I'm confident that if you allow yourself to be more open, you'll experience a guy who is much more than just a a guy with a good memory. 🙏

Edited Tuesday at 08:14 PM by Salvijus

[Hojo]

@Salvijus Basically he's lex Friedman of philosophy. hes there but only cause you like his personality he is faking for a camera?

And somehow me not agreeing with this is because I feel hes superior to me and I'm projecting.

 

Edited Tuesday at 08:30 PM by Hojo

[AtmanIsBrahman]

Alex is the only one in the debate who cares about truth. Dr K is concerned with how to live a good life, while the Christian guy is just defending Christianity. 
Alex is a good example of how to do truth-seeking. He went through the atheist stage orange and is making his way to green and yellow. Maybe in a few years his views will have evolved more (i.e. dropping atheism). Dr K just isn’t the best philosophical thinker and has an ideology combining science and Hinduism in a way that doesn’t quite make sense. The Christian guy is basing his argument on human psychology, which has nothing to do with truth as Alex pointed out. 
All Alex has to say is this: if you were born as an alien on another planet, would you ever hear about Christianity? No. Would you ever come up with the worldview that a human called Jesus is God and the only one who is God, and worship him? No. So the only way that you could have the Christian worldview is because you are a human who believed humans when they told you there was another human who came along with the one and only truth. Yet this guy thinks he actually has the truth and is doing good by spreading it in the debate!

It’s amazing how deluded people can be while thinking they have the truth.

[Hojo]

If you actually pay attention to how alex connor argues is he says some deep philosophical fact and then when asked to explain he will point to some philosopher he read or how it relates to a philosophical question. Not his own opinion. Hes just a bunch of philosophy quotes. Hes like a robot.

If you talked with him it would be essentially 

Hello how are you did you find purpose today?

Connor - well I dont beleive in God

Oh ok well do you feel any percentage of purpose today?

Connor - Well platos cave says this and this and this

ok.

Edited Tuesday at 11:31 PM by Hojo