Philosophy

>>9600850
>our universe is extremely complex

Brainlet detected

From now on you cant use the word philosophy.

>>9600850
>The universe is too complex
In comparison to what?

>>9600935
the other universes retard

>>9600850
You are retarded. Seek help from Christ and professionals.

File: watch-inside-800x445.jpg (89KB, 800x445px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 800x445px

>>9600850
ITT a fedorafag realizes he's actually a Christcuck

>>9600969
I fucking WISH this is what would actually happen, but too often it doesn't. People come up with the "we're living in a simulation!!" conclusions, but don't bother to take that further and think about just who could be running it.

>>9600850
i fucking hate you
stop making these threads

File: 1496038539160.jpg (13KB, 350x263px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 350x263px

Not literature.

File: 1496568381692.png (174KB, 700x950px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 700x950px

>>9600850
>Premise 4: Everything we experience is just a string of subjective experiences that aren't real
A thing that exists but isn't real? Faggot arguments like this make continental philosophers seem smart.

>>9600850
Bad/ missing premise. Theres no reason to believe the universe was created and hasn't existed infinitely without cause

>>9600850
Going by your first three premises, aren't you contradicting yourself? Because what would the universe that made the computer simulation be like? Wouldn't that be complex as well? Please start thinking on some deeper layers before spewing out some extremely shortsighted conspiracy; only then you might make your story a bit more... developed.

File: 1493555624319.png (12KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 420x420px

>>9600850
>Premise 1: Our universe is extremely complex
>Premise 2: The universe is too complex for it to have been randomly created

premises 2-5 are all very dubious. go fuck yourself.

Every single one of your premises is unbelievably retarded. Listing and numbering "premises" doesn't hide stupidity.

File: abside_sant_climent_mnac015966-000_001130_c.jpg_1306973099.jpg (57KB, 660x365px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 660x365px

The first premise is extremely stupid yet some somehow each of the following premises is somehow worse than the previous. How long did it take you to find something dumber than
>Everything we experience is just a string of subjective experiences that aren't real

Quite impressive desu

>>9600850
>we're always in a virtual reality
If we lived in a virtual reality we wouldn't be able to refer to it truthfully by way of semantic externalism

REEEEEEE THE MATRIX WASN'T EVEN METAPHYSICAL, IT WAS ABOUT THE ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE FUCKING PLEBBIT CANT INTO GREEKS BEFORE SHITPOSTING REEEEEEEE

>>9600850
Okay so I'm gonna try and drop some Putnam on you no philosophy doing pseuds.

If we are matrixesque brains in vats (BIV) then everything which we refer to in speaking or mentally is only a reference to something that doesn't veridically exist. This is because the BIV only sees simulations of things. Of course it seems possible to bracket out a statement for instance 'I see a tree' can become 'I see a tree (where a tree is what the projection of the matrix tells me a tree is)'.

The problem with this bracketing is that none of the words used in the bracketing refer to anything that is real, so the bracketing itself is not a positable statement because none of the words refer, or therefore mean anything.

Now it's common also to try and give words meaning by assuming that causation links predicates to a subject, but obviously, even the word causation for a BIV has no meaning as it refers to nothing.

The extent of this, which I have so badly explained is that if we were BIVs, because none of our words can reference anything, we cannot even menaingfully say that we are BIVs.

Fuck I've done this so badly, can OP just go and read Tim Button's The Limits of Realism please.

>>9603323
we cant use semantics to refute metaphysical problems. Putnam's externalism is only good insofar as it refutes epistemic problems about representings of the external world, not the external world itself

>>9600850
>Premise 2: The universe is too complex for it to have been randomly created

But a virtual reality is less complex than an actual reality. The robots would need to belong to an even more complex reality if they were to make an 'extremely complex' but less complex reality than their own. Unless they too are living in a virtual reality created by beings even more intelligent than them, etc. Also who made the robots?

Then where the fuck did the robots come from?

File: 1496062435603.jpg (68KB, 699x485px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 699x485px

>>9600850
I'm gonna assume this is bait.

>>9600850
Damn, you got me convinced!