So I killed a fly..

[Padawanbater2]

This thread has made me really realize the importance of philosophy, and it strikes me as unreal most people don't have the time, or couldn't care less about it..

The original OP was mainly about the thought that if there are millions of flies I couldn't care less about, why should we care about billions of humans? What is the difference? Why are humans more significant than flies?

 

[eye exaggerate]

This thread has made me really realize the importance of philosophy, and it strikes me as unreal most people don't have the time, or couldn't care less about it..

The original OP was mainly about the thought that if there are millions of flies I couldn't give a fuck about, why should we care about anything the billions of humans have to say or what they have to offer?

...are animals connected in any way? Do we call them animals when they're cheetas? As a grouping of things 'animal' they are animals. In plain sight they are cheetas. AND, etc
If you're looking southwest lol, you'll see that this means there is a connection in all things to all things - even with humans, though we tend to shave

 

[tyler.durden]

This thread has made me really realize the importance of philosophy, and it strikes me as unreal most people don't have the time, or couldn't care less about it..

The original OP was mainly about the thought that if there are millions of flies I couldn't care less about, why should we care about billions of humans? What is the difference? Why are humans more significant than flies?

Hey Pad. I've heard Maddox address this question, and he wasn't far off. Imo, the main reason why humans are more important than flies, or any other creature, is our potential. Humans are (well, some are) fully conscious and as such, we have the potential to master nature. Other creatures are simply reacting to nature's whims, and are not capable of attaining our level of culture and technology. To survive into the future, humanity is going to have to leave this solar system as our sun is going to burn out or go nova. Humans are the only hope ANY of Earth's creatures have of living on indefinitely, no other species is going to develop technology advanced enough to make vessels capable of galactic travel, or learn to bend spacetime to get us far enough away from inevitable disaster. Look how far humans have come in regards to controlling nature in such short period of time: mastering flight (as primates), developing vaccines for deadly germs and viruses, antibiotics, tripled our life spans, amazingly efficient agriculture, splitting the atom and controlled nuclear fission to create energy, built vessels to travel off of the planet and back again and to mars, radio telescopes to view the entire cosmos, light-speed communication around the globe, and mapped our own genome, just to name a few. If allowed to continue we will eventually develop technology to; live without aging or disease, control weather patterns, manipulate spacetime, discover (almost) free energy, change vast areas of the cosmos to be more habitable for life, develop light-speed (or faster) travel and colonize the galaxy and beyond, just to name a few. Cows, bats, or flies are not capable of such things and left to their own devices, they'd eventually be wiped out. Now, some may not view any of these things as important, but I am very excited at our species potential for becoming a major creative force throughout the cosmos. And if all that doesn't convince you, remember Jesus. He said we're more important than the other creatures, why would he lie?

 

[cannabineer]

...who else might be doing the understanding but me? It is how I understand the world, atm. Should I be ashamed, or astonished?

I'd be a bit self-conscious. cn

 

[cannabineer]

This thread has made me really realize the importance of philosophy, and it strikes me as unreal most people don't have the time, or couldn't care less about it..

The original OP was mainly about the thought that if there are millions of flies I couldn't care less about, why should we care about billions of humans? What is the difference? Why are humans more significant than flies?

They are so much more nutritious. cn

 

[eye exaggerate]

I'd be a bit self - consciously aware. cn

..............

 

[tyler.durden]

They are so much more nutritious. cn

especially with some fava beans and a nice chianti...

 

[mindphuk]

...who else might be doing the understanding but me? It is how I understand the world, atm. Should I be ashamed, or astonished?

Usually people use the term, "based on my current understanding." when they are referring to actual acquired knowledge about something that has an actual answer, not just merely thinking about something and coming up with what they would wish to be the case.

Now you answer my questions about what you base your understanding on by replying with a question about 'who' would be understanding. This to me seems to be a diversion from my actual question. I was already clear that you have an understanding, I was trying to figure out how you arrived at it. This is one of the reasons I typically don't respond to you, your replies are usually as cryptic as your original posts. I am not always sure if you are merely trying to distract and dodge the question or really don't understand what I'm asking.

 

[eye exaggerate]

Usually people use the term, "based on my current understanding." when they are referring to actual acquired knowledge about something that has an actual answer, not just merely thinking about something and coming up with what they would wish to be the case.

Now you answer my questions about what you base your understanding on by replying with a question about 'who' would be understanding. This to me seems to be a diversion from my actual question. I was already clear that you have an understanding, I was trying to figure out how you arrived at it. This is one of the reasons I typically don't respond to you, your replies are usually as cryptic as your original posts. I am not always sure if you are merely trying to distract and dodge the question or really don't understand what I'm asking.

...do you wish that science can solve the hard problem of consciousness?

...a few things about your post are peculiar. First is that you seem to think that I am purposely cryptic. Not the case. Also, you didn't answer my question about what science has to say about it (consciousness) "at its current level of understanding" - thus answering my question with another question, also

If science has yet to solve this problem, science is at its 'level of understanding' with respect to the problem it is trying to solve, correct?

...now this leaves me with one more question: why would you, of all people, look away from something seemingly cryptic?

 

[mindphuk]

...do you wish that science can solve the hard problem of consciousness?

...a few things about your post are peculiar. First is that you seem to think that I am purposely cryptic. Not the case. Also, you didn't answer my question about what science has to say about it (consciousness) "at its current level of understanding" - thus answering my question with another question, also

So you expect me to answer your questions but you still won't answer mine? Sorry, you can google what science says. I asked you a specific question regarding your personal thoughts, something you still seem to be hiding.

 

[eye exaggerate]

So you expect me to answer your questions but you still won't answer mine? Sorry, you can google what science says. I asked you a specific question regarding your personal thoughts, something you still seem to be hiding.

...yours is an outer science, which is fine and necessary. The answers that I can use to construct a worldview are from within. It's an amalgamation of science, philosophy, art, and religion (as it pertains to religare). Seems to have passed the ever-stringent tests of time, this whole balance thing.

...I think that all things are conscious at their respective levels. Evolution would be pointless otherwise, wouldn't it? Why would matter evolve if not to become something other than matter? Do you see what I am saying here? Is the human being an amalgam of all matter? Does the person (the reasoner) evolve or does consciousness itself evolve? This is a problem of mind, phuk.

 

[Zaehet Strife]

"You see, the thing is... is I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong...

I have approximate answers and possible beliefs and different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything and there are many things i don't know anything about.

But I don't have to have an answer, I don't feel frightened by not knowing things..."

 

[eye exaggerate]

"You see, the thing is... is I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong...

I have approximate answers and possible beliefs and different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything and there are many things i don't know anything about.

But I don't have to have an answer, I don't feel frightened by not knowing things..."

...always being uncertain is just as much a certainty

 

[Zaehet Strife]

...do you wish that science can solve the hard problem of consciousness?

Just as you have the audacity to sit there and claim that you have solved the hard problem of consciousness?...

I've been here before with you Eye, and I continue to see it with others such as Mindphuk. We ask you how you come to a conclusion, and you skirt answering because the only answer you can provide us is... "well, it's my intuition" or "I just know". And to respond to our questions like that would only reveal to us and to yourself that you really have nothing to base your conclusions on, except from your own opinions which are not based on fact... they are based on mere speculation and hearsay.

Even so, i still like you and find you to be an interesting addition to this web forum. Even if you do skirt around quite a bit.

 

[eye exaggerate]

Just as you have the audacity to sit there and claim that you have solved the hard problem of consciousness?...

...nice, audacity I cannot solve the problem of consciousness. I can only experience it if I work very hard.

 

[cannabineer]

...always being uncertain is just as much a certainty

I'm not sure about that. cn

 

[Zaehet Strife]

...always being uncertain is just as much a certainty

"Science tells us what we can know, but what we can know is little, and if we forget how much we do not know we become insensitive of many things of very great importance. Theology (spirituality), on the other hand, induces a dogmatic belief that we have knowledge where in fact we have ignorance, and by doing so generates a kind of impertinent insolence towards the universe.

Uncertainty in the presence of vivid hopes, dreams, desires and fears is painful, but must be endured if we wish to live life without the support of comforting fairy tales (or ideas we make up in our own minds)."

 

[eye exaggerate]

I'm not sure about that. cn

...'splain?

 

[eye exaggerate]

"Science tells us what we can know, but what we can know is little, and if we forget how much we do not know we become insensitive of many things of very great importance. Theology (spirituality), on the other hand, induces a dogmatic belief that we have knowledge where in fact we have ignorance, and by doing so generates a kind of impertinent insolence towards the universe.

Uncertainty in the presence of vivid hopes, dreams, desires and fears is painful, but must be endured if we wish to live life without the support of comforting fairy tales (or ideas we make up in our own minds)."

...so, have you formed your own thoughts yet? Are they conclusive?

 

[cannabineer]

So you expect me to answer your questions but you still won't answer mine? Sorry, you can google what science says. I asked you a specific question regarding your personal thoughts, something you still seem to be hiding.

Mindphuk, if i may ...
I think your main beef with eye is that what you want from him is definition. Something into which you can sink rational teeth.
It appears to me that a big part of his message is that definition is in and of itself a rejection of a vital sort of information, awareness, call it Tao even. Essentially (sic!) you're asking him to run against his concept of the universe. If I understand correctly (and i do not presume to do that; this is a suggestion immersed in the humility of true ignorance) you're demanding analysis of the ineffable. I still feel the ineffable has a place in human, uhm, consciousness. Fwiw. cn