two links
first this, for background: https://thepsychedelicscientist.com/2017/02/13/solving-the-hard-problem-with-idealism/
then this: https://www.reddit.com/r/theomagia/comments/64lob4/carl_jung_the_bridge_between_modernity_and_the/
the meat is in the 2nd one, but please read the 1st one as well
sure
AHAHA COLIN FLAHERTY HAS REPORTED ON US https://youtu.be/wTqfKkHO4GA
so just finished the first one, do you find any of those alternative views particularly compelling? @fallot
no, the way idealism is described is a close approximation of my own views
I don't know how I feel about this stuff really, something I'd never considered until now
I also can't really work out how the start of the first link you sent "debunks" reductionism
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2625893
90% of the time coalburners fuck a nog and make a niglet, the nigger buck leaves
90%
82% on government assistance? the fuck
@J · the issue is qualia
what explains subjective experience
a reductionist interpretation can tell you how the brain works
it can't tell you why red is red
thats where im having issue i think, the last thing you said
where it's like in the article "it can explain why you see red, but not why you feel red"
that just makes no sense to me
the word feel should not have been used
when you see red, you see something, why do you see that something?
why does red have redness?
we assume everyone sees the same red when they see red
in their subjective experience
if some people saw a different "red"
how could you tell via reductionism?
yeah we do but not much changes if you assume they see the spectrum differently to me
not being unable to see red
so assuming you wouldn't be able to tell by examining their eyes and they see a different red because of something neurological
how could you tell?
yeah, assuming that's all the same
imagine a clone of you in every physical way
who sees your "red" as your "blue" and vice versa
and understands everything in those terms
and in the situation where that isn't actually a phenomenon that could exist
hmm?
I didn't understand your last sentence
hang on i need to organise my thoughts, this is new territory for me
what were you saying about the clone
