If the brain creates our reality, how can it be in that same reality.
How can the brain create reality, while at the same time be inside of it.
how can a universe exist within itself? how does a set of all sets contain itself?
Makes no sense
> create reality
delete this dumb shitty unfunny thread please
>>8152333
No reality without an observer
>>8152331
In the same way that an operating system can be inside the operating environment it created.
>>8152335
no everything is there whether you exist or not retard.
>>8152331
The brain did not create itself
>>8152353
Why do you think that?
>>8152364
Consciousness is in the brain which lies within our perception of reality, the only reality that exists.
>>8152331
The brain interprets reality, not creates it. Don't be retarded.
>>8152415
Same thing. Wouldn't have
a reality without your brain, dummy
>>8152331
>Makes no sense
yep
>>8152331
the brain lets us perceive reality through senses, we are limited to what our brain can perceive, th ebrain doesn't really create anything
>>8152443
There is no reason to assume this and it makes the universe not make sense
>>8152443
>same thing
HURRRRRRRRRRRRR
Improper subset
The brain doesn't create, it forms information via sensory input and cross comparative analysis with previously stored memories.
Also:
>Begging the Question Fallacy
People that think that the reality they live in, the things they touch and see, is not subjective are losers.
>>8152405
Because it's fucking obvious? Explain the mechanics that make reality behind you disappear when you turn.
>>8152443
Not it's not, ffs. Your brain interprets signals that come from what's around your body through organs specialised through evolution to capture specific kinds of signals. You re not creating any of the signals (light, sound, matter) you re just aware it is there u fucking cunt.
>>8152331
Not it's not, ffs. Your brain interprets signals that come from what's around your body through organs specialised through evolution to capture specific kinds of signals. You re not creating any of the signals (light, sound, matter) you re just aware it is there u fucking cunt
Why the fuck did this cunt make another brain in the vat bullshit thread? Did we really need this?
>>8153663
You really need me to explain this to you? When you're dead nothing will exists, because neither will you.
There are infinite threads of space-time, infinite parallels of objects such as the brain.
>another /x/ popsci philosophy thread
>>8152331
>how can something be inside of a reality it created
Easily you closed minded retard
>>8154131
reread
how can something be inside a reality it constantly creates.
ITT: old philosophical concepts that were long dispelled by scientific discovery.
Example: If a tree falls in a forest with no one to hear it, does it make a sound? Of course, because sound waves occur, regardless of whether they strike an eardrum or not.
And "red" really is a scientifically defined position on the color spectrum, not just a fucking opinion.
Etc.
ITT: idiots
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_theory_of_mind
>>8154876
your autism is showing. Guess you can't grasp the concept that a deaf man can't hear. Our subjective ideas of red could be much different.
>>8154876
But if there is no one to measure the sound waves, do they really exist?
>>8154901
>Our subjective ideas of red could be much different.
Then all you've proven is that one or both of us have some level of color blindness, which is, again, a scientifically defined condition.
>>8154901
A deaf man can't detect sound waves, but sound waves still happen. Our subjective ideas of red literally don't matter whatsoever, because there is a physical wavelength of light that is defined by the word "red." The objective reality of sound and red will never change, regardless of our observations.
>>8153772
Actually, everything that existed when you were alive will still exist, because reality is not dependent on your perception. Just because you are no longer in it does not mean that the world ceases to exist, and to believe otherwise is the height of narcissism.
>>8154924
>because reality is not dependent on your perception
Reality IS your perception
>>8154919
no one argues the sound waves don't exist, they argue that they wouldn't if there was no way to detect them.
>>8154945
YOUR reality is your perception
>>8154950
and what is yours?
either way it is the only one that exists
>>8154958
when you die, reality for you ceases to exist. It goes on for everyone else.
>>8154961
If i can't observe them they don't exist.
>>8154965
for you. People die all the time and here were are arguing over your ridiculous postulate that objective reality ceases to exist for everyone when you die, still very much in existence.
>>8154985
yea, it makes no sense
>>8154974
For the dead, no one exists to them, yes.
>>8154965
I feel like this has to be b8. No way someone can non-ironically believe this
You have confused the narrative with the world. Let's make up a narrative of the narrative. The brain is looking at a story of the world. The brain can feel senses, but to remember sense and to organize senses it has to make a pathway that the brain then uses every time the senses are similar. Get enough of these together, in many brains inside your head, and voila! The mess that is human thought.
So the brain is a sense organ, that senses itself, and can sense itself sensing itself.
That's the story.
But here's your problem: how do you make a story of a story using the story making process that isn't biased by the story?
You can't. You end up with nihilism. No purpose, no cause and effect, no statistical inference, no objects, no perspectives, no truth.
So we find things "useful to be believed".
But why do we all have similar stories? Because the same world trains our brains. Big things don't fit in small things: deduction. Things follow other things: induction. Objects move as one, or repeat similarly: semantics.
The world has no need of making a story of itself. It just is. The world is indistinguishable from a narrative of randomness without a story teller to have a reason to give it a story.
The world is; your narrative is not. It is just a trick - a pathway and a feeling that lets you mistake the picture in your head, the story, the narrative with the world you can't know.
If energy can neither be created nor destroyed, then isn't our purpose, as human organisms that will die, to contemplate death and dying, as well as creating new organisms
>>8155007
>The world is; your narrative is not. It is just a trick - a pathway and a feeling that lets you mistake the picture in your head, the story, the narrative with the world you can't know.
>omfg so deep
Yeah, this is confirmed by science. UV, X-rays, gamma radiation, radiowaves, farts, all exist, but I can't see them (although I can smell the latter).
The brain doesn't create reality...it creates an impression of reality limited by the senses granted by evolutionary development, as well as an interpretation by the brain that same development also created. But we've augmented those senses with spectrographs, night vision, radios, radiation detectors, etc.
>>8155030
would a blind man know he is blind if no one told him?
>>8155046
Is he blind from birth? If so, the answer is obviously yes, and you should just get on with your point.
Our body can Only take in information that interacts with any sensory system we have.
This mean that information always have to pass to us from its source. And this passage gives rise to uncertainty and a need for error-analysis within its own system.
Thus life is a constant struggle to make sense of our experiences.
>>8155168
I mean no, sorry
