Posts Tagged ‘metaphysics’

Commodification and Linguistic Anarchism

January 6, 2017

Commodification

To think of things as commodities is to be part of a religion. This religion took the form of capitalism and dominates society today. Just as metaphysical Christian ideas have real, physical consequences, metaphysical commodity ideas have real, physical consequences. Just as Christian practices reinforce the belief in Christian values, capitalist practices reinforce the belief in commodity values.

Religions have come and gone, but since feudal monarchy was defeated in 1918, capitalism has ruled over all incompatible worldviews. The commodification of the planet is increasing as is the belief in commodity value and there is no indication that it will slow down. Competition between different worldviews leads to conflicts between worldviews if they include a system of reward for their believers. In addition, commodity values are limited by the demand for commodities, which creates competition over profit within capitalism.

The struggle for profit is increasingly focused on quick gains. The past is beyond more commodification and the future is difficult to commodify because it’s uncertain, particularly in the long term. Hence, the commodification of the present is increasing. Commodity values are not inherently evil, if they’re temporary or only occur on a small scale there’s not much to worry about, but once it becomes systematic the relative nature of these values establishes a praxis that overrules the real, subjective evaluation it’s based on and it is this systemic practice we call capitalism.

Waste

The supply of (more…)

My Rebuttal to a Metaphysicist

July 6, 2012

“To not believe in the Spiritual realm of our existence means nothing I say will matter to ya”

I disagree. I can listen to your arguments all day despite being a materialist. I think you fear that nothing you can say will be able to change my mind because that might mean that you don’t really have something revolutionary to say. You might use the same arguments others have used already and that have been shot down and let’s face it, so far religion  vs science is 0 –  100, the scientific method is the champion. We know now that we know. We know that we are things that know things, including the thing that is ourselves. We can look at it, we can feel it, we can hear it, we can taste it, we can smell it, we can dissect it, we can build on it, we can articulate it, we can reason about it, we can imagine it, we can dream of it, we can be it, we can be attracted to it, we can do it, as they say, we can fuck it, eat it and put it in a dumpster.

So, what is it? It’s you. Your body, your mind, your memories, your mental connection of interrelated concepts, your neurochemoelectrobiological processes and structures, your neuron cells, your hydrophobic cell walls, the enormous and unique molecule DNA that has created your body. Did God create billions of galaxies with billions of stars in each to fuse the tiny, teeny, really, really, really petite and wee lil little protons into atoms and blew up the stars like they were just flares that fizzle and die in a second? We’re really small compared to the star balls bursting while our sun is 4500 000 000 years old, as is the solar system, including earth but not the people who have lived here for not a very long time considering the threat of the bursting bubble overhead. But since we’re so small, we don’t have to worry about that happening any time soon. Instead we adapt to an environment which contains a sun, and an atmosphere, and gravity, and trees, and bugs, and water and carbon and nitrogen, which contain the same atoms that make up the DNA molecule. Wasn’t it clever of God to make everything out of the most common things, makes so much more sense. Almost so much sense it was self-evident and would happen even without a god just because of the laws of gravity and chemistry and matter and motion. Surely, it’d be hard to predict that humans would exist and we are unique, but the universe is material and it can be predicted, you just need more computational power than is in the universe to predict it, however, some predictions don’t need 100% accuracy. We can use our knowledge of the material world to explore ourselves, the universe and the smallest and biggest and oldest and fastest and the edges of the universe, although that might take millions of years and I’ll just mention it now and wont make it part of my election campaign for king of the universe in the year 232,100 ANNO DOMINI.

So, how can it be mental? We can study the body and compare objectively with each other and then compare that with our subjective experience. We find that it’s coherent to talk of the body as a material structure, a chemical signature in the universe, brought forth as a shield to protect and nourish the spread of the DNA molecule. That’s the meaning of life. As social and mental beings we don’t have to care about the meaning of life if we don’t want to. It is not coherent to talk about angels and gods and unicorns. Instead we ask if the body holds the answers to our souls and it turns out that the mind is produced by a machine which we can describe in detail down to the size of atoms, we even find the material causes of the mental experiences that proponents of metaphysics invoke as evidence for their immaterial claims. We can find the answers to deja vu, fear, vision, feelings, sex, the belief that the universe must be like humans, caring and willful, the belief that we are a magical constant that travels through time, but time is just a function of motion and we are not constant souls, we are new states of mind produces every new day, every time a single thing moves in the brain (except the sub/unconscious stuff), produced by the machine and always brand new. The reason we think we are continuous is because when our new us’ experience the world, the think about their past as it has been stored in the neurocellular structure and is activated by the input and roundput in the brain and upon remembering the past experiences of the body, we identify with that body, mistaking it for a soul.

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem, Consciousness and Cosmology

February 16, 2011

Just found this on youtube and thought I’d use or abuse it to explain my thoughts on the matter.

(more…)

Thoughts on Metaphysics (Not the Book)

December 13, 2010

“The universe is created from pure abstract potentiality.”

No, the potentiality is very real and mundane. We might not be able to see it, or be familiar with it’s nature, but just because it seems a bit strange to us doesn’t mean it is strange and abstract in itself. Instead, the theories that have hypothesized the underlying energy and principles of matter can’t be dismissed or misused; if you are gonna talk about a unifying field or waves or the observer effect, you better learn exactly how unifying field, waves and the observer effect are defined before proposing these are metaphysical phenomena and because they were hypothesized through a material theory it’s gonna be hard for anyone who really understands the theories to propose how these phenomena are instead not like what the theorists have calculated, but metaphysical, invisible, godly, and so on, an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary proofs and can’t in all seriousness be based on some amateur physicist’s misunderstanding of the theories.

“The universe is self-aware.”

(more…)

An Arbitrary Theory of Creation

June 15, 2010

All definitions are arbitrary but let’s, for the sake of argument, invent a word and let’s call it brème. The brème is only indirectly related to the knowledge of a person and/or its culture; it is only dependent on the existence of the mind-language and the knowledge of the relationship between physical objects and not the knowledge of the physical objects; i.e. it doesn’t matter if you have a definition of a computer or a fork, as long as you can define their relation to an apple. Brème in this case I define as the knowledge of the metaphysical world and its relation to the material world and by extension knowledge of the physical world as it is viewed by contrast of the metaphysical world. Fortunately, brème is a construct of the physical world since the metaphysical world is a delusion, not an illusion. We can do with brème like all other delusions, keep them and strike them out like Derrida, because while the physical world remains the same and real, our delusion is arbitrary, because of an undefinable principle of the physical world. It is not unknown, we know that it says that 1=2=infinity, but we don’t understand it because our mind-language (langue) can not define it without contradictions and paradoxes. We can call this undefinable principle God, but we can just as well call it flubbydiboo, it means nothing – actually it defines the concept of nothing to be used in the metaphysical world of our minds since it embodies the concept of the unknowable and knowledge=mind, so the opposite of knowledge which the undefinable principle by contrast defines, is the opposite of the mind, usually called God, but more appropriately called reality.

The idea of constant creation says that 1 and all are the same and that the metaphysical universe was created once, everywhere and all the time. The mind is a product of the constant motion of he body. The constant motion of the electromagnetic wave, the universe, forms local maxima perceived as atoms and bodies. Contrary to popular delusion, there is no future, nor past, nor present. The mind is created a few milliseconds after the body experiences what the mind believes it experiences. The mind looks backwards through moments of slightly delayed presents and deduced from them the idea of the past and when defining the past by drawing a line backwards, it can trace the same line the other way, into the future and thus create the future in its mind as well. It is not that the eternal soul is created by a God and is connected to, encased in or fused with a physical body. Instead the body creates the perception of continuity by letting the mind look back and draw the arbitrary line and call that line ego under the delusion cogito ergo sum. For each moment the past perception dies and a new experience of the mind is created. The new experience of the mind has access to memories, which are electrochemical imprint in the brain caused by previous body-experiences (not mind-experiences) and therefore each new day you wake up and call yourself the same person although clearly your mind has a new unique experience every moment of your life, it never becomes a younger mind and it is never an older mind than itself, it is always a new mind.

Time is a delusion of the mind. To understand delusion, imagine you’re walking in a desert, you got no water and you start to hallucinate that there is an oasis. In fact there is only sand, but in your mind there is an oasis, this is an illusion. A delusion on the other hand is when you see an oasis, and you drink the water and it refreshes you and you can continue onwards through the desert, but your definition of what happened, of what you drank and what it did to your body might not be an accurate description of the world. It is a practical definition of the world, a simplified version of the universe that can fit inside your brain which is tiny compared to the universe and needs to use generalizations and deductions to make sense of all the information that surrounds it. Your generalized understanding works well in familiar situations with familiar objects, like drinking water, but the further away from your normal understanding you get, like understanding quarks and black holes, the more inaccurate your understanding becomes. It is flawed already with water, but the flaw is so little that is has little practical impact on you and can therefore be disregarded and you’re misled to think you understand water, because you’ve never yet failed to deal with water, but think about it, do you really understand why H2O has such surface tension? In actuality, nobody knows the nature of water. But we are finite and therefore need to/do believe that we know.

(To be specific, we don’t know that the undefinable is a single principle. That’s the thing about the undefinable. To us unknowers, 1 unknown = an unknown number of unknowns. So it might be a  ‘principle of unknowing’, but it might just as well be ‘a fermented angel in the bark of a goat’s shadow’s reflection that’s gone a bit stale’.)