this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2023
372 points (94.1% liked)

internet funeral

6830 readers
3 users here now

ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤart of the internet

What is this place?

[email protected] with text and titles

• post obscure and surreal art with text

• nothing memetic, nothing boring

• unique textural art images

• Post only images or gifs (except for meta posts)

Guidlines

• no video posts are allowed

• No memes. Not even surreal ones. Post your memes on [email protected] instead

• If your submission can be posted to [email protected] (I.e. no text images), It should be posted there instead

This is a curated magazine. Post anything and everything. It will either stay up or be lost into the void.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do I detect a whiff of solipsism in the air?

It's true to a certain extent though. All you can know for sure is that your conscious self exists. Literally everything and any thing else could be a facsimile, an illusion...

For all you know you're just a Boltzman brain experiencing existence for the briefest moment before you decay to nothing.

But none of that really matters, we're the ones who give our lives meaning, so you might as well enjoy what you got while you still got it, whether it be chemicals or whatever the fuck.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

That's the plot to several Star Trek episodes.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Biology is complexity out of simplicity. Those mere chemical processes you deride involve enzymes, hormones, feedback mechanisms, homestasis, all working together. The simplest bacterium is more complex than any machine we ever made.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

And enzymes, hormones and feedback mechanisms all are chemical compounds which react with each other. But even chemical compounds don't exist like this but are just another model based on abstraction.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Gonna perish like a dog anyway. It was going well until the neo-feudalist call to arms. Dogs are based, dogs didn't kill the planet. The contrast in tone between the text response and Mickey's face is funny tho

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

This is a sixth or seventh plane astral meme

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I hope one day in my quest for knowledge, I become so cynical that it's contradictory

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Thankfully there are things called facts.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Are there? That sounds interesting, how do you know these facts to be factual?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Replication. If you take the same ingredients and put them together the same way you get the same thing. If you can repeat the process it's factual. This is a dumb philosophical argument.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a dumb arguement if you think philosophy is dumb, yes, lol.

Does repetition really mean truth? I must have seen the Inglorious Basterds assassinate Hitler half a dozen times, but I wouldn't claim that he died in Paris as a result of Operation Kino, even though I've seen the process repeat several times.

Why then should we think repetition is a indicator of anything being factual?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think philosophy is dumb but I do think it should be rooted in reality. That movie is a deliberately made up story. Written by a human who physically exists. Acted out by people who physically exist. You can't interact with those characters because they don't physically exist.

But by repeatedly watching the movie you prove that the movie itself exists and is factually real.

I said this is dumb because it disregards logic. Real philosophical thinking points don't completely disregard physical logic.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I'm not sure it was understood what was meant by the movie. It's not about a movie, it's about perception of reality.

You've made several assertions about the movie, how it was written and shot by people who physically exist. How do you know they exist? Have you interacted with them?

Also, how can we be so certain physical logic is real, compared to a movie? Is it simply that what we call reality engages touch and we don't know it to be fake, like we do a movie? Just because what we perceive to be reality isn't so obviously a charade, does that necessarily mean it is truly real?

Can you prove that anything you see around you isn't just a hyper-realistic simulation?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

Oh, I know.

[–] lowleveldata 5 points 1 year ago

More like commonly believed assumptions

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

You mean the fact that you’re just pure energy in a computer and you’re solely interacting with programs all the time?