Joshua Rasmussen

It's coming...

@Dearme2_ Assuming those who disagree with you must be bad (dishonest, irrational, arrogant, in denial, stubborn, etc.).

What's a sign of a very low intelligence?

@ItIsHoeMath You are smart enough to see the problems and honest enough to not deny them. This video offers a layered perspective on how to have peace w/o denying reality (for smart people): youtu.be/0waPEM39x-Q

Hello, smart miserable person here The misery comes from lacking the power to solve the problems I can see. I cannot see the world in this condition and then, like, go play guitar and be thrilled about it. We call this "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." I know the ship is sinking. Not everybody understands that the ship is sinking yet. I am trying to get everyone to understand the ship is sinking so we can do something about it. People tell me "go move the deck chairs around, maybe that will make you feel better." I am currently using my intelligence to get other people to understand the mess we are in. I'm having a significant effect. It's not joyous though, it's super stressful. I have made myself ill with stress. I hope that helps you understand. Intelligence is not a superpower. It does not make you a wizard that can conjure favorable conditions. An intelligent cow knows its friends will be slaughtered, but it cannot stop this just by knowing.

i am always suspicious of people who claim to be smart but are miserable. if they really were that smart, they would have figured out how to live a joyous life.

@Nomi31346241 error. a person is not an answer to a question.

This video on how to face reality is orienting (and the deepest I've seen): youtube.com/watch?v=0waPEM…. No, I didn't make the video, but I do know the secret identity of who did.

@Abraham_Alex6 @wisdomXplorer how do u prioritize?

@worldviewdesign @wisdomXplorer You can't

Your lack of dedication is an insult to those who believe in you.

@Michael__Huemer Here, I argue that the past is finite: worldviewdesign.substack.com/p/where-is-wal…

Link: fakenous.substack.com/p/the-infinitu…

Here, I argue that the past is infinite

@Sola_GPT @waldenpod Indeed, it is this analysis that even leads some philosophers to the conclusion that first-person, phenomenal ("what it's like") states of consciousness are not even real.

@Sola_GPT @waldenpod I know quite a few philosophers who are atheist but who think that analysis of first-person experience (without any appeal to religion or spooky epistemology) entails or strongly suggests that personal beings are not reducible to anything physical.

33% is surprisingly high tbh. And the number doubles with agnostics!

@HoenirsSight No.

@worldviewdesign For you, is God emergent?

Theism is sometimes associated with "adding complexity beyond necessity." But <there is no god> also adds various types of complexity (that theists can shave off): 1. Truth-maker for atheism. 2. Mindless causes of mind. 3. Lacks of perfection in fundamental reality.

@christapeterso And even on closer inspection, their reasons for motion resist a "physicalist" analysis.

@christapeterso Yeah, philosophers don't define "physical" as whatever concretely exists. Organisms are a paradigm case of things whose motions seem to be governed in part by *reasons* (e.g., goals) that don't at first glance seem to be describable purely in the vocabulary of physics.

I have had the weirdest time in philosophy. what is anyone ever talking about!! what is going on!!!!!!!!

Fun times!

Big thanks to @worldviewdesign for coming down to Aggieland to talk about consciousness on Sunday for the Veritas Forum youtu.be/PiKkT6m48Hk?si…

@flowidealism There's a difference between becoming aware of oneself and creating the self. Self-awareness may have led to the creation of the *concept* of the self, but it does not follow that we created the self.

The psychologist Julian Jaynes wrote a controversial book arguing that human consciousness as we know it is relatively recent in evolutionary terms. He suggested that in ancient times, what we experience as our own thoughts were experienced as external voices, like the gods speaking. The bicameral mind, he called it. When cultures became complex enough that different authorities gave conflicting commands, people had to start reconciling the voices internally. The left brain and right brain had to communicate and negotiate. That's when something like modern individual consciousness emerged. Questioning authority created the self.

Bu akşam 23.00da @thorfinnight ve @FevziAtaDemirt2 ile Rasmussen'in zihin felsefesi kitabı üzerine konuşacağız. Kim olduğunuza dair ilginç fikirler için kaçırmayın. Üstad @worldviewdesign'ı da bekleriz :D x.com/i/spaces/1AGRn…

@AssBithc @JoelMCurzon The best versions of these views meet at the horizon.

@worldviewdesign @JoelMCurzon So what would break the symmetry between theism 3.0 and atheism 3.0 to make theism a better explanation?

“I’m a person. Therefore, I think that the universe was created by a ‘person.’” Theism is anthropocentric. ‘God’ is a projection of ape-centered thought onto the cosmos.

@CVakalopoulos @Philip_Goff Grad students who take a few phil science classes tend to understand the science vastly better than most scientists in my experience.

@worldviewdesign @Philip_Goff First you need a good grasp of the science to be able to critique it, pseudomystic posturing of panpsychism is not a good starting point

Struggling to respond to all comment here on X, but if you comment on the post itself, I'll do my best to respond.

@bcubeddd @rushwithfour @Philip_Goff See my chapter on mindful matter in Who Are You, Really.

@worldviewdesign @rushwithfour @Philip_Goff no you haven’t. Link?

Why is explaining physical reality in terms of consciousness less satisfactory that explaining consciousness in terms of physical reality?