-  [WT]  [PS]  [Home] [Manage]

  1.   (new thread)
  2. [ No File]
  3. (for post and file deletion)
/phi/ - Philosophy
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 1000 KB.
  • Images greater than 200x200 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 735 unique user posts. View catalog

  • Blotter updated: 2018-08-24 Show/Hide Show All

We are in the process of fixing long-standing bugs with the thread reader. This will probably cause more bugs for a short period of time. Buckle up.

Movies & TV 24/7 via Channel7: Web Player, .m3u file. Music via Radio7: Web Player, .m3u file.

WebM is now available sitewide! Please check this thread for more info.

Anonymous ## Mod ## 11/10/26(Wed)10:01 No. 3905 ID: 4c1a8e [Reply] Stickied

File 13196161034.jpg - (71.49KB , 256x256 , slow.jpg )

For growing and shit or whatever I present to you:


Put in whatever resources that fit in here, whether it's from wikipedia, youtube, some university, or where ever. Just remember to keep it within the board's guidelines and rules.
Use it or lose it, faggots.

42 posts and 6 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 22/07/24(Sun)18:34 No. 15021 ID: 3742c4

You can find there lectures on many philosophical subjects

Anonymous ## Mod ## 12/02/02(Thu)05:26 No. 5920 ID: 4fb7fa [Reply] [First 100 posts] [Last 50 posts] Stickied

File 132815678430.jpg - (161.57KB , 500x452 , 6904084_Untitled-2.jpg )

This thread is for discussion of the validity of religion(s) and arguments for and against the existence of god/gods.

Any other new posts about this subject will be deleted, or locked and referred to this one.

New threads about religious concepts that play inside their own ruleset are allowed, and we kindly ask that you refrain from turning those well meaning threads into arguments about religion as a whole.

380 posts and 29 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 23/08/20(Sun)12:01 No. 15332 ID: d0fe53

Let's think this through: If there was any real Gods we'd see their people create a stable and successful country. But as we can see none of the people who claim they have a "God" behind them have a long lasting success.
For all practical purposes "money" itself is a better God than any other invisible God claims.

READ THIS BEFORE POSTING YOU PILE OF FAGGOTS Anonymous ## Mod ## 11/09/09(Fri)04:51 No. 2371 ID: 175f07 [Reply] Locked Stickied

File 131553668277.jpg - (24.94KB , 400x615 , formalblacktie2.jpg )

We interrupt your scheduled bickering for this important announcement: Understanding /phi/

  • What this board is:
    • A place to discuss epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and logic, in a general sense, or in an applied sense (in sex, science, vidya, your mother).
    • A place where not only is being a pretentious, hubristic dickhead is allowed, but is considered the norm.
  • What this board is not:
    • It is not /b/, /x/, or /rnb/.
    • A place to spew incoherent nonsense and verbal diarrhea.
    • A place to make claims with no justifications (and "because I say so" or "because you're gay" isn't a justification).
    • A place where the global rules do not apply.
An inability to follow these conventions will result in a warning!
Repeat offenders will be banned!

Anonymous ## Mod ## 11/12/04(Sun)05:06 No. 4980 ID: 4c1a8e

Dear faggots,
I shouldn't have to remind you, but if someone is posting something against the rules, please report it.

If you don't know how to report a post, please see our super-sugoi FAQ section on the front page.

Thank you for your co-operation.

Blind faith is inescapable Anonymous 23/09/26(Tue)13:39 No. 15344 ID: 9008d4 [Reply]

File 169572839620.jpg - (24.06KB , 640x307 , lightning-1158027_640.jpg )

If we come to think about it everyone is operating based upon blind faith to one degree or another. I mean, for a start, let's take what we all consider to be historical "facts". Let's consider two people arguing over a historical "fact". One sites one "source", the other sites another. Both are convinced 100% that what they believe(only believe) to be historically true is true indeed. But none of them were present/alive when the historical "fact" they are discussing happened, none of them observed it with their own senses, so in the end it is just "faith". They calculated in their brains a "plausible" reason to put their "blind faith" in whatever historical source they chose to believe.

Same is true for a lot of science and scientific "facts". People observe a few things mentioned in their science textbooks/websites/papers/whatever, and then choose to put "blind faith" in whatever other things mentioned in their scientific sources that they didn't observe themselves(through experiments or their senses). I mean I am a Christian, and I am sure the most of Bible deniers could find at least 1 or 2 things in the Bible they agree with, but they would counter, test, and try to confirm everything else mentioned in it(no problem with that, they should). But not with the historical and science sources. We observe some things to be true in the history or science sources, and then by nature consider everything else in them to be true, we all end up putting blind faith to varying degrees in our sources. I am not saying that those sources are invariably wrong, they may be right, but blind faith is inevitable.

Same with geographical "facts". No one has traveled the whole world for themselves, and confirmed things for themselves that what is shown on the maps is true, like let's say Asia is to the east of North America(just an example let's not get stuck at this point). Again, not saying that the maps are false, but we all do take them to be true blindly.

I'd go as far as to say, most of what a human being is composed of, what he is, is based on blind faith(which in no way implies that what we believe is untrue).

what is woes, just tryna find my way lucee most sane user 23/09/23(Sat)06:01 No. 15343 ID: fb0e48 [Reply]

File 169544166812.png - (624.79KB , 1090x766 , 47732998420.png )

does anyone have anything based on more esoteric philosophy, any ideas or concepts that seem more strange and interesting and over the edge I wanna hear em. I've tried researching on this and it seems as I want to get back into philosophy I can't find much on material on this as its more logical based for my taste. Also just got a kindle so any recommendations for the best classics you believe that can probably be found in pdf free online would be appreciated.

question emo+kiddo 23/01/19(Thu)19:08 No. 15221 ID: 9b5a9b [Reply]

if a religion does not have a god or entity how does it work

3 posts and 1 image omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 23/03/19(Sun)03:33 No. 15257 ID: 62d54d

If you'd ask me, a religion doesn't need to have a God to be considered "religion". If anything involves a person taking things based on blind faith, he is being religious. This would also include people who take whatever they read on their favorite science website or a science magazine as a fact, directly, without questioning(basically blind faith). I guess if we look at it this way, every single human on the planet is actually religious to at least some degree.

Anonymous 23/08/20(Sun)11:53 No. 15331 ID: a410f2

The concept of God is fake and used to control the uneducated masses.

Anonymous 23/09/07(Thu)09:39 No. 15340 ID: 968a69

Faith is a part of what makes a religion but you need something that is tangible for worship both or either in the real world for your physical senses or the spiritual world in the case of your mental senses. If there is no worship then it is simply a folk belief or an engrained part of someone’s culture. People in Iceland who believe in fairies have faith they’re real even if they didn’t see them, but having faith in the existence of fairies doesn’t mean fairies are the whole of or part of your religion. Moreover I am of the opinion Carthage should be destroyed.

A mind that affects matter Anonymous 22/09/17(Sat)14:23 No. 15149 ID: 02e9f5 [Reply]

File 166341741118.png - (109.93KB , 640x320 , qcoklmowd8841.png )

>For the experimental data, the outcome supported a pattern of results predicted by a causal psychophysical effect

>...these results were found to support von Neumann’s conclusion that the mind of the observer is an inextricable part of the measurement process.

>Baer's independent analysis confirmed that the optical apparatus used in this experiment was indeed sensitive enough to provide evidence for a psychophysical effect.

>The results appear to be consistent with a consciousness-related interpretation of the quantum measurement problem.

Apparently there is a strong aversion within the scientific community regarding how consciousness tends to go beyond regular cause and effect when you measure its influence on its surroundings. The materialistic interpretation of reality fails to explain why these unusual occurences exist and why you can never see a physical link between these events.

Are you convinced that there is only matter in this universe and nothing else?
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

27 posts and 9 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 23/08/01(Tue)16:29 No. 15325 ID: 2fb1aa

If you don't know who Karl Lashley is the whole story is like this: Karl Lashley systematically tried and failed to find how memories are stored by ablating cortical tissue at varying locations in rats after maze-learning, and concluded that “This can only mean that the retention of the habit is conditioned by the total amount of functional tissue in the cortex and not, primarily, by the inherent properties of the synapses themselves” He destroyed tissue in different parts of the brain and realized that no matter where he destroyed the tissue the function remained the same. He couldn't find the actual memory itself and where it is stored.

>Memories are thought to be encoded by sparsely distributed groups of neurons. However, identifying the precise neurons supporting a given memory (the memory trace) has been a long-standing challenge. We have shown previously that lateral amygdala (LA) neurons with increased cyclic adenosine monophosphate response element-binding protein (CREB) are preferentially activated by fear memory expression, which suggests that they are selectively recruited into the memory trace. We used an inducible diphtheria-toxin strategy to specifically ablate these neurons. Selectively deleting neurons overexpressing CREB (but not a similar portion of random LA neurons) after learning blocked expression of that fear memory. The resulting memory loss was robust and persistent, which suggests that the memory was permanently erased. These results establish a causal link between a specific neuronal subpopulation and memory expression, thereby identifying critical neurons within the memory trace.


The funny part about this study is that they claim to have erased a memory by altering chemicals in the brain when in reality they removed a fear response. Fear is not the same as memory. You can't think to yourself that "now I will become afraid!" and as a result you experience fear. Fear is attached to danger. Fear of death when you see a bomb, a starving white shark, a poisonous snake or a man with a gun in his hand is not the same as the memory itself. If you remove fear from a memory you remove a feeling and not the experience. The shark is still there, the snake is still there, the bomb is still there and the man with the gun is still there but you lack fear. They don't even explain what a memory consists of and how you construct a specific memory from scratch.

>A specific memory is thought to be encoded by a sparse population of neurons. These neurons can b Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

Anonymous 23/08/25(Fri)09:55 No. 15333 ID: 62090e


Anonymous 23/09/03(Sun)19:25 No. 15337 ID: 2fb1aa

File 169376195211.jpg - (71.43KB , 600x600 , Who be when.jpg )

>Learning in the Octopus
>The animal cooperates readily in laboratory experiments. Tests of its capacities before and after brain surgery lend support to the idea that there are two kinds of memory: long-term and short-term

Another man called Brian B. Boycott did similar research like Lashley except in octopuses. He removed tissue inside the octopus vertical lobe and found that the memory, quite paradoxically, is stored both everywhere and nowhere.

aadhi balaji 19/10/06(Sun)17:45 No. 14208 ID: 9a7f87 [Reply]

File 157037674547.jpg - (22.69KB , 832x468 , medium-athah-anime-your-name-kimi-no-na-wa-mitsuha.jpg )

how do I cope with the fact that true love is an artificial concept that exists only in fiction.In reality we are all just animals looking to breed and we wont ever have a spiritual connection with anyone or a "special" bond with anyone.tfw no mitsuha gf

4 posts and 1 image omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 22/01/12(Wed)00:34 No. 14881 ID: 244334

Marriages back then were for purely procreational purposes. The 19th century saw the Romanticist movement with their idea that marriage is based on romantic love. And romantic love is based on what is now called chivalry.

Anonymous 22/04/06(Wed)21:46 No. 14924 ID: 1242ac

File 164927439047.jpg - (189.74KB , 750x836 , 1649200557209.jpg )

True love is more a combination of best friends and ultra commitment. You have to both intentionally try to be weak around eachother and rely on eachother.

It's actually closer to the love you feel for a son / brother than how movies portray it. The type of affection movies portray comes in waves. It's very nice but not the main appeal. My favorite part about my relationship is the teamwork.

Anonymous 23/09/01(Fri)00:45 No. 15335 ID: 10fb33

>Love is great because it's beautiful. Who cares if it's just your brain telling you to find a mate? It's a wonderful feeling and that's all that matters.

Thats funny because when teens try to enjoy romantic love, society shuts them down.

Jacobkun9666 23/08/18(Fri)10:31 No. 15330 ID: 6f88fc [Reply]

File 169234749594.jpg - (414.93KB , 1125x1081 , IMG_3863.jpg )

Dear 7chan ,

I finished my second manuscript in record time . It is actually revolutionary , and as such no one is allowed to read it unless I am handsomely rewarded . The leviathan that is threads is safeguarding it . I just happen to have a great trust in this leviathan and as such am not worried , for I doubt even a Mr zuck is capable of accessing my work either actually or figuratively and that coincidence being both factive and meaningful and distinctly and totally and partly so is exactly what my book is about , explains , and proves over and over and over again , kind of like how blind people don’t immediately assign felt gestalts to visual gestalts upon receiving sight , my book will blow not people’s minds into a new sense of gestalting and that’s both a joke and a prediction , which I know with much certainty to be quite possibly factive possibly —- but enough modal jokes and zauberbergian as published in English by those people in turkey references post side : i don’t present to any of you my second philosophy !

Bests ,

The author

Jacobkun9666 23/08/11(Fri)08:57 No. 15329 ID: b308ae [Reply]

Hey y'all

I finished my first philosophy manuscript . Here's almost the finished version . I figure y'all can handle it . My first philosophy manuscript is called Kinds and Degrees . I am currently working on my second philosophy manuscript . Neither of these manuscripts are my first or second , but they are respectively my first philosophy manuscript and second philosophy manuscript : the prior being my first first philosophy manuscript and the latter being my first second philosophg manuscript : i call this first second philosophy manuscript Ontic and Idaöntic : this first second philosophy manuscript of mine is possibly the first first second philosophy manuscript to ever been have written yet . This book took many years of research . I hope it will get me into a phd program . The pdf file was made by google drive and is 65 something MB large . It is well over 25000 words . But i'm not much of word count kind of guy . All art unless obvious is mine . All commentary is welcome . I love giving talks . I already have bachelors from a large state school . But they screwed me over with a shitty grandfather grading clause so i have a 2.0 instead of s 3.83 and my life has been a living hell . I figured if i rigorously solved every philosophy problem before applying i'd be a strong candidate for a phd in philosophy . I managed to solve basically every single problem a first philosophy calls to be questioned and resolved : i address historical arguments and arguments about the historical : i solve the einsteineian problem of loss of objectivity in science through a mathematical deduction based on a certain proof from graph theory . I then apply said application (which i call in [shorttitle] Ontics , a "morphic" a la morphisms but sidestepping import of category theoretic presuppositions and ideontics (which are distinct from concepts ( but that's second philosophy stuff ) ) toward a philosophy of sense ( distinct from Baumgarten but not entirely not ) for it is similar to Husserl's states goal of phenomenology in his entry for phenomenology's encyclopedia entry , but I distinguish my first philosophy from Husserl's , Aristotle's , Heidegger's , Sartre's (Herder 2(too) but that's in book too 2 ) , Wittgenstein's , Hegel's , and notably Kant's -- for i found a novel formal proof which refutes all of Kant and establishes a possibility for a speculative realism but without Meillassoux's self-contradictions he imported into his long form argument against Dogmatism ( which i also address in the book ) -- for the philosopher's who would agree with my work , I found that their work simply was of a slightly different consequent of similar enough trajectory to not outright completely dispute / refute ( hume and spinoza ) -- I turn Deleuze on his head -- I do not address much ethics outside of a support of a kind of logical utilitarianism but via Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

Delete post []
Report post