|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Dec 10, 2021 21:57:53 GMT
When you're thinking are those stuff inside your head - are those things yours? - A person would asnwer positively. When you're thinking are those vibrations inside your skull - are they yours? - A person would answer positively. When you're thinking are those neurons inside your brain - are they yours? - A person would answer positively. When you're thinking are those interactions between neurons yours? - A person would answer positively. When you're thinking are those combinations of system of neurons yours? - Positively. When you're thinking are those systems of group vibrations yours? - The same. When you're thinking are those number of microwaves yours? - Yes. When you're thinking are those words yours? - I guess. But what makes us be certain about our own thoughts? Who sais our thoughts are ours? How one knows that the thoughts inside his mind are his own thoughts? Where is that criteria of making the draw line? There is no certainty.  |
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP 
Elder
Posts: 2,697 
Likes: 1,758
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Dec 11, 2021 6:37:01 GMT
This reminds me of that philosopher Descartes who got in a big tiffy over whether all reality and perception around him was being manipulated by an omnipotent being and how he couldn't be sure if anything was real and indeed if he was real. In the end, he realizes that even if everything he perceives is a lie he still thinks and perceives things and that, "I think therefore I am." The only problem with that? Exactly what you've posted here. How do you know your thoughts and perception are yours and are also not a lie?
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Dec 11, 2021 13:05:22 GMT
This reminds me of that philosopher Descartes who got in a big tiffy over whether all reality and perception around him was being manipulated by an omnipotent being and how he couldn't be sure if anything was real and indeed if he was real. In the end, he realizes that even if everything he perceives is a lie he still thinks and perceives things and that, "I think therefore I am." The only problem with that? Exactly what you've posted here. How do you know your thoughts and perception are yours and are also not a lie? Oh, this is totally true. This is indeed cartesian type of thinking or understanding. I know that some psychologists highlight the types of schizophrenia in which vocals inside a head sound. Those people can doubt are those thoughts inside their heads are really theirs? And you know, I think that a philosopher has to be careful with his thoughts. Because many of phillosophers end like Nietzsche had. Moreover, the philosophers would better visit a church or to read Bible, instead of spending their time reading books with dubious content. Anyway, this problem may be viewed withou referencing it to Psychology. I think we can continue the series of these questions further asking: How thoughts are circulating? (...being circulated?)
Can thoughts replicate? (Or can thoughts be copied?)
How exactly the process of thoughts interaction happen? (Or what this process might look like?)
|
|
|
|
Post by thesageofmainstreet on Dec 11, 2021 21:06:53 GMT
This reminds me of that philosopher Descartes who got in a big tiffy over whether all reality and perception around him was being manipulated by an omnipotent being and how he couldn't be sure if anything was real and indeed if he was real. In the end, he realizes that even if everything he perceives is a lie he still thinks and perceives things and that, "I think therefore I am." The only problem with that? Exactly what you've posted here. How do you know your thoughts and perception are yours and are also not a lie? Oh, this is totally true. This is indeed cartesian type of thinking or understanding. I know that some psychologists highlight the types of schizophrenia in which vocals inside a head sound. Those people can doubt are those thoughts inside their heads are really theirs? And you know, I think that a philosopher has to be careful with his thoughts. Because many of phillosophers end like Nietzsche had. Moreover, the philosophers would better visit a church or to read Bible, instead of spending their time reading books with dubious content. Anyway, this problem may be viewed withou referencing it to Psychology. I think we can continue the series of these questions further asking: How thoughts are circulating? (...being circulated?)
Can thoughts replicate? (Or can thoughts be copied?)
How exactly the process of thoughts interaction happen? (Or what this process might look like?)
Ironically, those who do put these doubts into your head are the outside agitators here. The thought-control ruling class wants to inhibit us from believing we can have independent thoughts. By the way, our independence also includes outside thoughts that we alone make the decision whether to believe in them, but not outside thoughts that we only agree with because we feel backed up by the designated authority of the ruling-class's thought-master: "Why do you believe that?" "Because the Captain said so, that's why." "Well, I believe the opposite because the General said the opposite, so I'm right." |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Dec 13, 2021 8:14:24 GMT
Oh, this is totally true. This is indeed cartesian type of thinking or understanding. I know that some psychologists highlight the types of schizophrenia in which vocals inside a head sound. Those people can doubt are those thoughts inside their heads are really theirs? And you know, I think that a philosopher has to be careful with his thoughts. Because many of phillosophers end like Nietzsche had. Moreover, the philosophers would better visit a church or to read Bible, instead of spending their time reading books with dubious content. Anyway, this problem may be viewed withou referencing it to Psychology. I think we can continue the series of these questions further asking: How thoughts are circulating? (...being circulated?)
Can thoughts replicate? (Or can thoughts be copied?)
How exactly the process of thoughts interaction happen? (Or what this process might look like?)
Ironically, those who do put these doubts into your head are the outside agitators here. The thought-control ruling class wants to inhibit us from believing we can have independent thoughts. By the way, our independence also includes outside thoughts that we alone make the decision whether to believe in them, but not outside thoughts that we only agree with because we feel backed up by the designated authority of the ruling-class's thought-master: "Why do you believe that?" "Because the Captain said so, that's why." "Well, I believe the opposite because the General said the opposite, so I'm right." Agree. I know that not many believe in the conspiracy theory. I do. It doesn't mean that it is for now to have the consipiracy, but I think that it is highly possible to have it. The thesis is: a) we cannot deny the presense of the consipracy; mafioso, corruption, high levels of criminals, ect rather confirm the presence; b) it's better to be prepared agains any conspiracies, so in this case we'd better believe there might be conspiracy, than to think that there is no such. Also, it's not pointless that the conspiracy can exist even unintentionally. This may occur in case fools occasionally win. And in this case, the whole situation works against us, if we would be out of our minds, and so on. So, it's a double true that someone can control our mind, and we should be careful in this question to avoid pitfalls and traps. |
|
|
|
Post by thesageofmainstreet on Dec 13, 2021 20:25:55 GMT
Confusing People Is Their Gateway to Maintaining Their Self-Appointed PowerIronically, those who do put these doubts into your head are the outside agitators here. The thought-control ruling class wants to inhibit us from believing we can have independent thoughts. By the way, our independence also includes outside thoughts that we alone make the decision whether to believe in them, but not outside thoughts that we only agree with because we feel backed up by the designated authority of the ruling-class's thought-master: "Why do you believe that?" "Because the Captain said so, that's why." "Well, I believe the opposite because the General said the opposite, so I'm right." Agree. I know that not many believe in the conspiracy theory. I do. It doesn't mean that it is for now to have the consipiracy, but I think that it is highly possible to have it. The thesis is: a) we cannot deny the presense of the consipracy; mafioso, corruption, high levels of criminals, ect rather confirm the presence; b) it's better to be prepared agains any conspiracies, so in this case we'd better believe there might be conspiracy, than to think that there is no such. Also, it's not pointless that the conspiracy can exist even unintentionally. This may occur in case fools occasionally win. And in this case, the whole situation works against us, if we would be out of our minds, and so on. So, it's a double true that someone can control our mind, and we should be careful in this question to avoid pitfalls and traps. If you've heard of a conspiracy, it's a plant to throw doubting people off track or to make the authorized opposition look weird, which intentionally makes the ruling class look sane in comparison. With the power this decadent class has, it is inconsistent to think that they don't create and control the fake opposition to them. |
|
