Jon Jones Had a Prior Run-In With The Law For Suspended License And 'Loss Of Traction' in November '11 - Bloody Elbow

swampskater · 2012-05-22T23:57:53.759774+00:00

I'm gonna have to ask you to edit "totes" to "totally". r/mma etiquette prohibits the use of "totes," "obvi," and "whateves."

mmp123 · 2012-05-22T23:46:50.669850+00:00

You would be interested in the line of thought from Leibniz to Hume to Kant. Leibniz bases his philosophy (and the calculus he later creates) on the idea that perception doesn't matter, the fact that we have a shared experience proves the universe is objective. Hume's life work is the development of Empiricism (Classic Empiricism nowadays). He argues that we can only know what we perceive and that even causality is simply based on the assumption that things will always happen the way they do now. Kant brings the two sides together ingeniously.

This book covers it briefly.

mmp123 · 2012-05-22T23:39:25.756742+00:00

We don't have access to Objective Reality if it exists at all. We only have 5 senses that present us a limited amount of sensory data. And it's not even clear that we have the tools discern the small amount of data we get. Math and logic are incomplete and in some cases paradoxical. Alduous Huxley said that our consciousness is a reducing valve limiting reality to what we can barely grasp onto.

It might seem like science is giving us inherent truths about the universe but it is only giving us truths about our perception of the universe. Laws of physics are based on custom insofar as we believe they are objective assuming that what happens tomorrow can be deduced by what happened yesterday. There is no necessary law of the universe that says tomorrow gravity might simply disappear but we have to believe it won't out of practicality. In that sense what we usually think of as "objective reality" is really just "practical reality".

xKrazExMNUx · 2012-05-22T21:06:47.952332+00:00

Joe Rogan?

slywalker · 2012-05-22T21:02:43.720787+00:00

lulz

slywalker · 2012-05-22T21:00:46.805922+00:00

What's interesting is that neuroscience is showing us that the bit that makes the actual decisions is in the brain; they can see indicators of decision making happening in the brain before you consciously make a choice, which makes it look like the feeling of making a choice is secondary to the process of decision making itself, which happens below the conscious level

This is based on ONE of Libet's experiments in which he could predict with only 80% efficiency someone's decision as long as they made it 6 seconds after the initial choice. It is unclear as to whether this experiment measures actual rational choice or whether it is measuring how well you can guess someone's intuition or immediate gut response.

I don't think the experiment has anything to do with free will unless you do it over longer periods of time with choices with more than 2 outcomes. I'd like to see if the experiment holds up when the subject has at least an hour to consider more than two paths.

NeoPlatonist · 2012-05-22T20:33:08.738649+00:00

Please link to the article in which your story actually happened. How are you so sure that torture would actually bring about a true confession? Also, these cases are so rare that it says little about the morality of torture to begin with.

This is just another case of Sam Harris being contrarian for it's own sake. He's positing his position as controversial but it really isn't.

Void07 · 2012-05-22T20:19:50.274311+00:00

In logic you can use an encoding to describe the logic system itself

Systems of logic and mathematics cannot prove themselves. This is called Godel's Incompleteness Theorem

NeoPlatonist · 2012-05-22T20:16:07.038977+00:00

Doesn't Sam Harris argue in the Moral Landscape that moral principles are scientific and universal? Because here he is making a conditional case for torture. I thought that any moral principle is either true or false, Sam.

Also, when are there ever "ticking time-bomb" cases? It's a straw man.

Void07 · 2012-05-22T10:42:38.428527-07:00

Does a tree feel that photosynthesis is meaningful to its life?

Void07 · 2012-05-22T17:42:10.695522+00:00

If you believe that language is connected to meaning by a brain process, you are actually positing yourself outside of that brain process. So it is necessary to explain how the 2nd brain process created meaning within the 1st brain process. And there you have infinite regress (because talking about the 2nd process creates a 3rd). This means that you are never actually addressing the problem, you are just moving it a step back.

treycouv · 1 day

I'm gonna make a meme instead?

robertoandrad15 · 1 day

Wow. What kind of fucking society do we live in where roids gets you 6-9 months and weed gets you a year?

3kixintehead · 1 day

This question is usually called The Problem of Induction

jrh1984 · 1 day

Thank you for this article. PKD is my favorite author of all time because he wraps philosophic problems into sci-fi plots and story lines. A Scanner Darkly, The Man in the High Castle, VALIS, and Do Androids could all make an author famous if they were his only work. The fact that PKD wrote them all proves he is the best sci-fi writer of all time.

iknowdell · 1 day

The Problem of Induction

BreakfastGuru · 1 day

Not as weird as dumb.

iknowdell · 1 day

I was leaning more towards Hume because I do think the mind is physical information. At the same time, I don't necessarily believe the brain and the mind are one in the same.

ObstreperousYoungLad · 2 days

I've had bad trips... they're terrifying.

iknowdell · 2 days

it is an attitude that makes no assumptions about reality and looks at things purely subjectivly. All presuppositions must be suspended, including the ego.

In that case, how do we know anything but the mind is real. If all presuppositions must withheld then everything must be mind. How can you trust that your senses are actually telling you what's real and not just what appears to be real? Taking your position, it must be that the mind is the only thing we know is real. In this case, then, the mind comes before the body.

Benjips · 2 days

First of all, this is the worst post I've ever seen in r/phil. Secondly, anything you do to someone without their consent that they clearly don't want done is immoral. End of story.

Bad_Misinfo_agent · 2 days

That's the website that made the gif http://ironforgesiron.com/

iknowdell · 2 days

What does that mean?

iknowdell · 2 days

He's saying that since he can posit himself outside of his body, then the body is necessarily different than whatever is acknowledging that there is a body.

killzy707 · 2 days

Wait a second. You didn't like jones until he got into a drunk driving accident? You're a moron.

Hold423

TROPHY CASE

Hold423

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login