Can someone link a wiki entry on Solipsism and cure this fucker? Also to Grant Morrison.
>>78266797
>the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist.
what?
>>78266838
It ties into his mind numbing views on the magickal and real.
>>78266838
How's that going to "cure" him?
>>78266858
Ok?
>>78266882
Go away you daft prick.
>>78266905
>go away you draft pick
>>78266797
It's useless.
Alan and Grant are blinded by their quest of "enlightment", which is on itself a flawed concept.
They believe that reading ancient forgotten lore with give them the ability to see the world in a way no mortal can. That is silly of course, thinking that someday you will have an epiphany and simply "understand" existance is silly, and a belief based in the poor understanding of eastern writings, to the point they become pop trash.
>>78267134
From what I've read of their ramblings I reckon they are both trying to present themselves as spirits free from constraints bothering the squares which is supposed to translate in their art. Therefore they assume this ridiculous pose of an pseudo occult practicioner, not quite occult mind you because that would also be too ridiculous so they invent bunch of caveats and weasel words to wiggle away from extremely simplistic notions they adhere to. Enter the reality-questioning mumbo jumbo spreading over several paragraphs, Crowley name drop, obscure demon reference, the absolute madman I-was-classicaly-educated-but-I-chose-to-worship-both-David-Hume-and-Shin-Megami-Tensei-while-gazing-into-the-melting-plastic-barbie-arm-in-my-backyard. It's pathetic they go to all these conferences and no one ridicules these ponces.
>>78267261
while I like the Hume/SMT bit, I think you're being a bit harsh. I don't think they're claiming to be mega genius truth revealers to the plebian masses
>>78267306
Not harsh at all, the man is a braindead spewer of thoughts. Would be booted out of epistemology 101.
>>78267261
I like to think that Alan started the whole magick thing as a H.P. Lovecraft parody/homage, since he published a book called "Neonomicom" while H.P. was know for writings related to the Necronomicom, and H.P. had a marketing gimmick were he said most of his "Chtulhu" writings were real tales related to him through some way or another and that he believed them 100%, I thought Alan was just a fan doing something similar, specially since he acts quite playful about his beliefs in certain interviews... But then his first wife left him and took the kid, so he went fully nuts.
>>78267477
Might be the case. I think discordianism (no matter how he denominates himself) is a mental illness, a mix between solipsism and an attempt at sequestering reality to better fit a new purpose, or better yet to give life a new purpose. Common with transgender crowd.
Mystics are always simplistic creatures hiding behind sophisms, I wonder if Moore would be decent enough to come out as a post-structuralist.
>>78267385
All that is innocuous if strange and not really elitist at all. Its when they start talking about drawing sigils and masturbating it gets ridiculous.
>>78267520
Have you recently binge-read wikipedia philosophy pages?
>>78267543
Have you read it? I'm too lazy to upload the whole "essay" but it's even more simplistic than Camel Rides Again. I'd say that any sort of anti-intellectual poseurship pretending to be insightful is deeply elitistic.
>>78267575
Do you eat shit?
>>78267579
I don't see how its elitist to very simply explain plato stuff to people. Nor anti-intellectual.
>>78267632
Plato is post-sophistry anon.
>>78267632
Everything is magic, yo.
Thinking about buying bread and then actually buying it? Magic. Going into drug fueled nightmares while your common sense dissolves in self imposed euphoria banquet? YOU CAN'T IMPOSE YOUR REALITY UPON ME!
The guy is infantile and mentally ill.
>>78267704
what do you mean by that?
>>78267749
oh okay you're conflating a value of the psychedelic experience with a 4chan nerd hatred of the "reality denying" SJWs? why?
>>78267385
That's just someone trying to explain the ineffable experiences we all have. And, unconvincingly, it tried to use dualism to explain what is real; a thought or an object? And dualism is rapidly losing support in neuroscience.
That being said, I enjoy some of this philosophical ranting, if for no other reason to analyse flaws. It's better than most of the shit people read.
>>78267837
>value of the psychedelic experience
Please.
>>78267520
>Common with transgender crowd.
fuck off with your /lgbt/ /pol/, we hear enough of it on /co/ to bring it into this shit.
You may be right that it's an attempt to 'plug the gap' in our experience. But if you say this is a mental illness, then you are saying all religious belief is a mental illness, as Dawkins as said. Is that was you are saying?
>>78267870
alan moore seems to value it. why is he wrong?
>>78267704
While in principle I agree, as he became too dogmatic, most historians and philosophers would dissagree
>>78267855
>explain what is real; a thought or an object?
This was covered by epistemology since Descartes.
>>78267894
Faith is not mental illness.
>>78267905
Because it's a slippery slope argument. Every sort of psychological disorder, temporary or permanent can be then seen as something valuable. Hence the rituals.
>>78267938
have you ever had a dream that told you something about yourself? not even going into the psychoanalysis stuff
>>78267938
>This was covered by epistemology since Descartes.
And has been opened up time and time again since.
>Faith is not mental illness.
yet you fail to explain how it is any different than the belief in a magical deity. Faith in magic is the exact same as faith in a magical being.
>>78267997
Inducing delirious experiences isn't exactly an insight.
>>78268012
Because what Alan Moore does with his arbitrary beliefs is a retreat into a personal landscape drowning out the outside world he perceives as no less real than his random ramblings. He becomes a chaotic zealot no different than the worst religious stray minds.
>>78268061
>no different than the worst religious stray minds.
you are saying more of why it's the same as religion and not why it's different. I'm a bit of an anti-theist, but I don't go as far as Dawkins in saying it's a mental illness. It seems you do.
>>78268225
Alan Moore's approach is the mental illness. It's not just about his choice to have faith - to create a faith centered around a certain subject - but to outright claim that the very idea of it created in his mind is inherently true just because he convinced himself it is so. It's the same as giving yourself to God, just under the guise of free will.
>>78268036
Ever had one? I expect not. But people have been doing this for a long fucking time, and not just through drugs but through exhaustion or fasting or many other ways of impacting your thinking. There is also, finally, a lot of research going on now that shows MDMA and psylicybin are a much better treatment for a variety of mental problems, from PTSD to addiction. In the later case the success rate in trials has been 60%, which is FAR higher than the 15% or so it is for any other methods.
>>78268316
Mental illnesses are incurable, best you can hope for is give them pacification in form of various drugs so the mind don't get too torn on itself. Schizophrenia and LSD went hand in hand for a good reason. And claiming that you have to get naked and fucked in the ass by chief bongowongo's frog smeared cock to ascend to higher plane of consciousness is also a logical fallacy. Personally I think it's a gigantic stain on Huxley's career.
>>78268307
> It's the same as giving yourself to God, just under the guise of free will.
Uh huh....so are you saying that free will doesn't exist in, say, Christianity? Every idea of god is created in the mind. And every argument you make contradicts yourself in the same sentance.
>>78268452
I don't see how any of that is a contradiction. I adhere to the notion that free will is a bunch of somewhat unpredictable personality tenets reacting to stimuli from the outside word and our personal biology. Retreat away from the unquestionable reality these stimuli present to our inevitably bridled consciousness is to be a ponce at best and a mentally ill maniac at worst.
>Every idea of god is created in the mind.
Organized religion that has woven itself in cultural model of, say, Western Civilization is quite a different beast than a bearded madman skulking in the corner trying to 'educate' us on benefits of solipsism.
>>78266797
>wiki entry on Solipsism
Why not a website with cat memes?
>>78268394
>Mental illnesses are incurable
There have been numerous techniques tried and many of them have failed but some are successful at a cost, others are selectively successful and still others are just life long medication. The early ones were shock therapy (still used) and lobotomies (in essence still used for brain tumors, pretty sure for other things as well).
Many mental illnesses are more curable than others, like PTSD vs autism. I just don't think you know what mental illness is
>>78268524
Mental illness may be a broad term and I am not too familiar with terminology for lesser disorders but I consider Moore's train of thought to be a clear indicator of depression veering into mania. Every occultist I've met has had similar personality traits and inevitably slipped into chaos magick.
>>78268493
>Organized religion that has woven itself in cultural model of, say, Western Civilization is quite a different beast than a bearded madman skulking in the corner trying to 'educate' us on benefits of solipsism.
Just because you assert it does not make it so. Many of these so called New Age religions are attempting to bring back beliefs that predate monotheism. And having one Pope in Italy does not make something suddenly more...objective than having a shaman in charge of a small community. Your correlations are deeply flawed and...well just terrible logic leaps.
As for your first point, Monotheism practices many forms of separating your mind from physical reality: Fasting, lent, meditation, prayer, communion is supposed to be one.
>>78268580
Confirmation bias
>>78268580
ok, well you are using anecdotal evidence. Not saying you don't have a point, but I would love to see a study on that, especially comparing traditional shamans to new age practitioners. Unfortunately, in these days with universities clamping down on 'offensive speech' these kind of studies would be hard to do.
>>78266797
OP the thing about solipsism is that it's unfalsifiable. Yes, we live in a universe governed by physical laws - that apparently do break down around the edges and change over time - but that doesn't mean that's the only way of interpreting that data. Physics, apart from the very small amount directly observable on our planet and the other planetoids we've visited so far, is in large part concerned with decidedly unintuitive processes. There's a great deal of argument as to how our universe actually works (as there should be). We don't even know what 90% of it is actually made of - "dark matter" isn't something you can observe directly, and we've yet to produce any in laboratory conditions. It's odd, isn't it? Something that should be as common as the dirt you farm can't be produced or discovered in a laboratory. Yes, it probably is out there, and all around (and probably inside) you, but it isn't proven. Yes, it might be proven tomorrow, but you can't know the future.
Now, isn't that solipsistic in the same way? No? Then you don't understand the concept of solipsism, or the nature of an unfalsifiable statement. There's nothing to cure; there's nothing wrong with unfalsifiable statements because they can't be proven false, and therefore can't be wrong, just undetermined.
And you want to "link a wiki entry" and "cure" someone with it? I mean, did you think you also understood the complexity of psychopathology to the point that you were capable of diagnosing mental illness? Seriously? That's childishly pathetic. Are you even 18 yet?
>>78268689
>anecdotal evidence
His reasoning in his articles.
>>78268749
>OP the thing about solipsism is that it's unfalsifiable.
And therefore ... oh, I've finished your post. You're making a strawman. I wave you off as I would a demon.
>>78268749
>there's nothing wrong with unfalsifiable statements because they can't be proven false, and therefore can't be wrong
jesus christ
>>78268797
the only "proof" against solipsism is a sheer feeling that it's wrong, though. yes?
>>78268789
So do you actually want to "cure" them or is this just to feed your ego?
>>78268852
It's just about finding refuge in wordplay. It's lazy and insulting to our civilization. It's 'strength' is why you shouldn't consider it in the first place.
>>78268909
I just wanted to ridicule Alan Moore.
Morrison is the most pretentious sack of shit I've ever seen in my life and I find it amazing that people can read anything he writes and find it compelling rather than being seized by the urge to strangle him.
>>78268925
>It's just about finding refuge in wordplay. It's lazy and insulting to our civilization. It's 'strength' is why you shouldn't consider it in the first place.
>I just wanted to ridicule Alan Moore.
So to feed your ego.
>>78268934
Now you're just faking posts again.
>>78268938
I really don't think that ridiculing Alan Moore makes me an egoist.
>>78268749
You stated this conversation perfectly. A comparison CAN be drawn to stuff like multiverse theory, something that is fundamentally (at least that is the thought) untestable. Is it science? Sure. Is it good science? Certainly not.Although some theories of multiverse may be tested, like many worlds interpretationBut in the end solipism is not BAD in any way more than everyone else's wrong biases, we all have them. Some people still believe we haven't landed on the moon, talked to one recently and asked him if I could show him through a telescope would he believe it; nope, he said. Everyone has biases that make them believe incorrect things
>>78268960
But the thread is really more about you trying to force your own belief system.
>>78268993
What system would that be? Pointing out logical fallacies isn't really a system of belief. Like this one right here
>>78268963
>In an analogy, two objects (or events), A and B are shown to be similar. Then it is argued that since A has property P, so also B must have property P. An analogy fails when the two objects, A and B, are different in a way which affects whether they both have property P.
>>78269234
>Pointing out logical fallacies
Are you sure you're not committing confirmation bias? Again?
>>78269266
No, I just pointed out false analogy.
As for your post, it's a strawman fallacy because you pretend I comitted confirmation bias earlier in this thread.
>>78269234
you lazily dismissed solipsism as semantics, mr genius logical scrutiniser
>>78269234
I'm tiring of your low bar arguments when you ignore the majority of what I type and just attack one part.
>>78269287
>Alan and Grant are blinded by their quest of "enlightment", which is on itself a flawed concept.
Sounds more like it could apply to you just as much as them.
>>78269341
Pointing out flaws does not make one's reasoning flawed.
>>78269291
Solipsism should always be just waved away.
>>78269329
I am not well equipped to discuss theoretical physics or whatever the fuck multiverse theory is and I have a prejudice that vast majority of it not only isn't science, but is a sham wasting resources better employed somewhere else. But I won't pretend that such reasoning is true.
>>78267477
If your only frame of reference for the occult is meme shit like HP fucking Lovecraft then you have no right to talk about Alan Moore.
>>78269392
>Pointing out flaws does not make one's reasoning flawed.
That's a logical fallacy.
>>78267134
>>78267261
Would you call yourself an atheist?
>>78267520
*tips fedora*
>>78269392
>but is a sham wasting resources better employed somewhere else
So you're committing the cherry picking fallacy now.
>>78269392
>Solipsism should always be just waved away.
why?
>>78269427
No it's not. I did nothing else than point out flaws.
>>78269432
I have no idea. I'm interested in psyche but consider psychology anti-scientific. Agnosticism is a slippery slope that leaves far too much room for blind faith.
I think we've found the Most Amazing Athiest
>>78269456
I am not commiting any sort of fallacy by admitting I don't know much about experimental physics or whatever you fucking retard.
>>78269460
Let's have a discussion whether we're dreaming this thread, then. Are we brains in a jar?
>>78269466
>I did nothing else than point out flaws.
Flaws with your own confirmation bias and cherry picking.
>I have no idea.
The most insighful thing you've said in this thread so far.
>>78269488
>I am not commiting any sort of fallacy by admitting I don't know much about experimental physics or whatever you fucking retard.
Now you're getting hostile, so I assume I'm on the right track. You accuse Moore and Morrison of committing fallacies by committing fallacies of your own. Does that mean you are upset that they do things similar to you but with a different belief system?
>>78269392
>Solipsism should always be just waved away.
I really want to agree with you, but the Brain in the Vat propose has not been refuted yet, and with increasing computing power and neuroscience advancements it HAS to be taken seriously.
>>78269488
>Let's have a discussion whether we're dreaming this thread, then. Are we brains in a jar?
so basically what you're trying to say is that its a problem that you find useless or troubling and you would rather avoid it?
so its something you can't disprove by reason but by a leap of faith?
>>78269466
Yeah, I thought so.
Now we know to ignore your ramblings and just have a hearty lol at your expense.
>>78269466
>psychology anti-scientific
It is not, it is more scientific than string theory has been (so far) but it still has experimental basis. Unfortunately, just by the nature of it, it has a very small sample size.
>>78269525
>>78269523
http://www.academia.edu/874689/Scepticism_and_knowledge_Moore_s_proof_of_an_external_world
Don't get stuck on solipsistic nonsense, its 'undisprovability' is just a blind alley.
>>78269590
That is the most lazy proof I ever read, and yes I read it in school. It's fucking bullshit and has SO many problems, not the least being which if you hold up a hand is that what you do? This is only taught in school because it's so flawed
>>78269590
pretty sure witt tore this down
>>78269679
Shut up, figment.
>>78269735
LEAP OF FAITH
E
A
P
>>78269749
Figments are leaping indeed, into vats, jars and whatnot.
>>78269749
aren't people praising solipsism doing exactly this? they are putting faith into a system just because it's impossible to disprove. i really don't see anything solipsism offers, it's not even witty because then you become a snob and pressupose other people put blind faith into everything said to them from the pulpit or university chair.
>>78266797
Did you just learn a new word or something?
>>78269809
yes either way it is a leap of faith
>>78269905
what other way is there to solipsism? scientific method that has built our entire civilization is a leap of faith because you chose to pout and be smart?
>>78269961
scientific method could easily prove it, like the brain in the vat thought experiment. to believe or not to believe it is a leap of faith.
>>78270014
that's not proof, that's assumption. solipsism is immune to scientific proof but i don't see why does that make it relevant in any sort of way. cartesian doubt has been outdated since 18th century.
>>78270045
SOME parts of it are immune, not others. Rate the ones that can be falsified higher than ones that can't
>>78270045
I don't see how the fact that its been around for a while solves the problem. It may very well be "useless" but its there and remains there and assumptions only validate or invalidate it.
>>78270140
my point is that it isn't a problem belonging to a realm of science.
>>78270205
yes that is my point too. its one of the gaps people would much rather jump over, as you and I have
>>78270230
yes but i don't think that ignoring solipsism is a victory for the concept as it seems to be the attitude of some anons in this thread.
>>78267134
Ironic how someone lambasting adult cape comic readers can be so philosophically infantile.
>>78270292
no one is really advocating it, only showing the limits of scientism and the need for faith
>>78270296
So he'd be at home here then.
>>78270292
wow I misread what you said, sorry. yes I agree. waving it off because it's not scientifically scrutable is silly and ignores its weight. its like that kierkegaard thing about truth being infinite passion in the face of infinite uncertainty.
>>78270504
we disregard there then, i don't think solipsism has more weight than a feather. you notice it and it floats away unless you stick it in your cap like moore did.
>>78268513
>He doesn't know
>>78269409
the HP reference has nothing to do with the occult but I creator with a gimmick of "believing his fiction works are real", like Alan's famous writing about meeting J. Constantine on a pub.
>>78270672
Chimney or gambrel?
>>78270672
Again, your understanding of philosophy and literature is totally shallow. HP Lovecraft was not a philosopher. He was a pulp writer, and never pretended to be otherwise.
Please stop presenting HP Lovecraft as anything else you drooling moron.
>>78270822
Lovecraft the person would be the first to wave off solipsistic nonsense.
>>78270874
fuck off, he was an abused person who lived in solituded. He wrote great stuff, but his mental state was terrible
>>78270994
Wouldn't say that, he was a frail youth that grew into a rational and solitude person.
DUDE LSD LMAO
DUDE DRUGS DONT ACTUALLY PROVIDE ANY INSIGHT THEY JUST MAKE THE MUNDANE SEEM DEEP LMAO
DUDE EGO DEATH IS A MEME LMAO
DUDE DRUG INDUCED EGO DEATH IS NOT REAL BECAUSE NOTHING CAN SEPERATE US FROM THE SUM OF OUR EXPERIENCES WITHOUT PERMANTENTLY DAMAGING THE BRAIN LMAO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=af2q_u0Fu8I
>>78271396
Reminder that PKD was mentally ill paranoid schizophrenic
>>78271442
"mental illness" is a meme
>>78271270
Sounds like they triggered you.
>>78271472
meme is a form of obsessive compulsive disorder
>>78271509
memes are a tool of the demiurge
>>78271544
like a mantra?
>>78271544
If the universe is irrational, then how do you know if you yourself are rational?
What is your measure of rationality if the universe has none?
>>78272325
you don't know, the i-ching does that for you
>>78272325
Everything is chaotic. Rationality is based on perspective. When someone feels like something is right they can convince a million others of the same thing if it feels right to them.
>Come back home from studying for Philosophy Ph.d. (mostly phenomenology & pragmatism) all day
>Think I'll get comfy find a nice storytime thread on /co/ to let my brain decompress
>See this thread
Why are fedorafags so bad /co/? It's not even just new athiests anymore, it's everyone going "BUT THAT CAN'T BE PROVEN WITH SCIENCE!"
>>78273180
Hope you're going for that elusive departmental chair, metaphysics isn't exactly in vogue.
Probably gonna be a gawker intern? That chaos background is gonna help with your twitter handle.
>>78267134
Alan is better than Grant.
Grant is blinded by his egotistical fanboyism.
Alan saw how the comic industry really was, along with the superhero genre and is understandably fed-up with it.
>>78267520
Moore is as post-stucturalist as you can get, the mysticism is there to underlie a greater skepticism against modernity, like in From Hell or Promethea.
I never really saw Moore as a new-age kook, nothing of what he says gives that vibe.
>>78273645
Strictly speaking I'm doing Philosophy of Education with a healthy amount of performance studies.
Job wise I'm not too fussy. Just gonna ride the lecturing train until the wheels fall off, cross that bridge when I come to it.
>>78273696
I think part of that Alan has constantly been shat on by the industry and holds creator rights to be very important, whereas Grant has always wanted to write capes, particularly capes for the big two, and does (or at least did) whatever he could to keep doing that. They both worked on 2000AD, but Moore left because he had a falling out with the then publishers, Fleetway, over author and artist copyrights and fair pay, while Grant lobbied to do their first "proper" American style superhero and then used that to springboard into doing stuff for DC. That's one of the bitter ironies of the Watchmen fallout that's sometimes missed, Moore only went to DC because they promised to be fairer than Fleetway.
>>78274190
>Moore only went to DC because they promised to be fairer than Fleetway.
Not just Fleetway but also Dez Skinn.
>>78274449
Isn't Dez Skinn at the heart of that Moore/Morrison Miracleman spat as well?
>>78274645
Possibly.
Thread theme
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHA1qxsLH-0
>>78270822
Read my posts again, idiot.
I was referencing how I thought some part of his "Author Persona" were actually just a character inspired by H.P.'s own persona and not a legit interest in the occult form either one, but I have to admit that after reading this thread he does seem to believe the shit he says and has turned that into a philosphy and even a mythology.
>>78273696
>Alan is better than Grant.
>Grant is blinded by his egotistical fanboyism.
Well, Moore seems to have created a how new mythology around random random OCs that have little to no basis on actual existing lore, while Grant just reads some entry level stuff and thinks it's cool to gather random mementos, so I find Moore much more pretentious.
But Moore seems to believe a weird mix of "mind over matter" pop philosophy and other light occult stuff, while Grant believes that Superman is the literal memetic reincarnation of characters like Samson and Hercules, and maybe even Jesus and Zeus. And that taking part in the mythology of these characters is going to grant him the Godlike status he seems to think these characters have, that's why all his works are so meta, he is trying to manifest these "Gods" into the real world by connecting fiction with reality.
So I find Grant much more crazy... but fun.
>>78274190
Moore is basically a scorned lover of a drunken abuser when it comes to his relation to the mainstream comics industry.
He has several good points when it comes to artist's rights and not bending over to please Hollywood in movie adaptations, but most of his Cape bashing is just a hate boner for DC (a not undeserved one, but still). He wrote fucking Tom Strong for fuck sakes, that man can't hate cape comics.
>>78276219
Don't Moore and Grant share the common ground of not being actually enlightened by anything but instead they chose to take a stance on a certain matter and adhere to it like it was an absolute truth - like Superman/Zeus thing you mentioned - and then parade that stance around, gleefully awaiting challenge no one really cares to give?
Isn't it just
>It's real to me dammit!
choice brought up to paroxysm?
