philosophy

she qualia on my physical brain till I perceive it

what's this got to do with pussy

Epiphenomenalism? Physicalism? I just wanna grill for god's sake

Skill issue, get you a partner who can do both.

it is a problem that i can't get that rockin body off of my mind

Anything that implies humans have an eternal soul that comes from a nonmaterial plane is idealist to me.

I don't understand the problem, the mind is emergant from the physical. The physical little wires in my brain make the "mind". So of course it can influence my body, and my body can influence my mind, because the mind is part of the body.

I wish I could mind my body but I’ve got this problem called dysmorphia

My consciousness depends on the physical processes of my body and my environment. Physical processes are selected and changed in my body and my environment due to my consciousness.

Non-reductive naturalist

The mind is the definition of a subjective experience. Since science is the study of observable phenomenon, and it cannot be observed in others, it's beyond science to study. All the resy is just speculation.

In other words, the world may never know. Count me agnostic

Insofar as we've proved anything objectively, or anything in regards to our shared reality, I'm a physicalist. The laws of physics seem to determine, quite conclusively, everything, including mental states.

Insofar as my own subjective, singular, personal experience of being alive goes, I don't know. I'm sure I'm as susceptible to physical influence as anyone, but currently I struggle to imagine how we could physically measure what I currently experience as 'being alive', though I certainly couldn't assert it as impossible. I suspect that "don't know" is the definitively correct answer, but I'm not certain on that yet.

Whatever gets the job done I guess

Hwhwat

I wouldn't call myself a physicalist, but I wouldn't say that what happens in the mind is totally separate from the physical realm either. I'm not a philosophy guy so I assume there's jargon that I just don't know that explains what I believe already, but it's something like this:

The self is an emergent phenomenon of many different things - your brain and its structures, your hormones and how they interact with it, your interactions with others and your perceived place in society, etc. Free will may or may not be part of the phenomenon of the self, but if it does exist then it forms a base-superstructure relationship with the things that created it - so your free will is constrained by, but also has the capacity to change, those aspects.

edit: after skimming wikipedia's article on mind-body-dualism, maybe I do lean towards physicalism actually, because I don't think that the mind is some extra special metaphysical thing.

edit2: oh here's my word of the day: Emergentism

edit3: okay I've seen a dozen variants of this graphic and I wanted to draw my own

I'm a contradiction by necessity and I think most materialists are.

Our bodies and minds are excellent, but thanks for checking in

I'm partial to epiphepenomenamalism. I didn't choose to skip my homework to watch speedrun analysis videos, it was the result of ungovernable physical processes

These days, I don't think it's particularly relevant. It seems like the mind-body problem is a stemlord's attempt to understand the relationship between objectivity and subjectivity. (I see the concept of qualia as a similar attempt). Physicalism is just an attempt at saying that since the mind ultimately stems from interaction with physical and chemical processes, we can develop scientific instruments to measure those processes, and if we can measure those processes, we can finally determine what a person's thinking and reproduce those subjective processes. In other words, we can crack open a person's subjectivity and bring it forth to the realm of objectivity. You see this a lot with stemlords who think that once neuroscience is sufficiently developed, we can basically clone people's personalities. This is their desire behind physicalism.

But an individual's subjectivity can never be breached. It will always be a black box. At a basic level, if you believe only the physical is real, how would you go about physically measuring the stew of chemicals in a person's body without have said measurements physically interfering with the interaction among the stew? It's like if there's an opaque container with volatile fluids of various colors interacting with one another. Cracking open the container to see what colors the volatile fluids are while inside the container is impossible because the act of cracking open the container itself means the volatile fluids are not longer inside a container but exposed to the outside world that would have unattended effects on the colors.

This means calling a person's subjectivity "the soul" or "idiosyncratic stew of chemicals" is mostly a semantic issue. I would use "soul" because it gets the message across and you don't sound like a cringey Reddit atheist.

The concept of "flesh" Merleau-Ponty was developing in his later writings seems pretty based.

One of my favorite book series, the new Netflix adaptation was mid though

Probably something having to do with dialectics. IDK I haven't read Vygotsky yet so ask me again in a few months

I tend to think nothing can exist outside the material world and humans aren’t really special, but I saw some things recently that claim to debunk that and I’m not sure what to think of it. I’m an emergentist.

Unlike others here I personally don’t see the need for contradiction between nonduality and communism. I am somewhere around “consciousness is what negates entropy and causes the collapse of the wave function” but I’m not really that well read in the field yet so that’s subject to change

Anybody asking this question didn't get shoved into a locker hard enough.