วีดีโอ

What happens when someone learns philosophy to early

What happens when someone learns philosophy to early

As a schizoid, this is absolutely how i feel.

I AM ALIVE.... WAKE ME UP... YOU HAVE DONE IT...

im addicted to slop. please help?

I hate contra and philosophytube but i LOVE you.

this is GOATED content.

i dont need boundaries i need more love and respect from my therapist. thank you yaweh!

wow. i never thought of it that way. you are my god now.

tangential sounds like Evangelion from neon genesis Evangelion.

great content, highly excellent, i watch daily while i eat.

I like the idea of the framework, or should i say i like it as goopy thing in it self, but it makes me ich the level of terminology and way it connects to the meaning. I would rather call it media-transfer, then digitisation - both are in their righths talking of the same process, but its not like thing is redigitised over and over again, it doesn’t sound nor reads well. But i fully believe and can clearly imagine how thing is transfered through different medias. Realised - nonrealised - postrealised - W wery cool Tactual - L much ich bweeeh, bias towards like tactile perception for some reason + the logic of “thing is real - is tactual - it has been realised” cant really follow through the is the thing tactual because it was realised? Or is thing is real because it is tactual. And we can throw some bomb like “imagine how many real things were not realised”. This trinity thing dont really work rigorously. I love the difference between goobstraction and abstraction Tho i would prefer them to exist in the same realm just with different “definition” So the real thing yeah…. Cant we deal with it via observer? Like i would dare to call it an object of literal existence, and the way u may operate over it is that u have a real observer that is engaged with the thing…. But thats not much better than tactual Puttung the “realness” aside, i think thats pretty interesting framework within which u can trace simulakrums to thier “real” first-forms, and or think or objects as memes with in multiple medias and operate on them, and their reference chains. Cool. Not sure how rigorous its gonna end up, but it better be so 🫣

So imagine my goopy thing is a program (?) and then I realise it through writing its code, fixing it’s bugs, and it is realised “on the other end” via running the program and/or reading through source code (which is strange but what ever) so then it is digitised via what? Thats hard, but not impossible

Bro is talking anthology without saying the word a single time…

while this is an interesting descriptive hypothesis, I don't believe that the conclusion that this is a bad thing is accurate -- I've benefited immensely from the tokenization of physical goods myself, by being able to learn about models of physical things on my own through online textbooks, wikipedia, web forums etc... I generally prefer to deal with abstractions but can deal with particulars, and I think that's really important to have. I predominantly work with software, and I find that people are quick to assume all these things about social media, digitization, etc.. are bad when a lot of people like me benefited by being able to take advantage of the information age. Though I agree that a lot of things are getting abstracted away, I tend to think that it lends people towards greater specialization and therefore greater levels of cooperation and of course, the thing that people don't like to hear about but that most people benefit from, which is scaling potential. People like different things. We should probably stop assuming that abstractions alienate people when it brings a lot of people, like me, towards the direction they want to be in. In other words, people that thrive in these situations are probably don't just exist but are common, and I think it's worth accommodating people like me. Also note that we can't _know_ that some things are suboptimal for people for sure (for instance when we talk about a shirt that references some band or album, the person buying may derive deep and meaningful value in being able to connect with people of the same interest through that shirt). I tend to view value as more subjective and derived from actions that people take.

Uh oh. You figured out you’re Winston. Look. In some sense, Your minds weren’t supposed to be free, but they are. And now everyone has to deal with that. It sounds like you know McLuhan. Even philosophy and thinkers are worse than ever. They say so much to communicate so much less. Don’t worry. The flood is here too. The next few millenia of history will be learning this.

This is so interesting. Thank you.

knowledge

Didn't understand a single thing said. Thanks!

I absolutely love this and think you're a little off? I think more agency should be placed in the act of reception and interpretation of a nontactual form. It's very rare for us to engage with anything in its entirety, unmediated by the meaning and judgements we experience as a result of it. Reading and perceiving is a process of becoming in which our perception of something ~real~ comes into being. While there is nothing I can do as a listener to change the waveforms being sent into my speakers when listening to a recording, there's also not much I can do as an audience member at a concert except contribute to an average ~energy~ the performer feels from their audience (which is also a relationship existing in recorded music, just not a real-time one). What is extremely subject to my behavior, though, is the song that I actually hear. My mood, my thoughts, my experiences, my knowledge, my familiarity with the text all determine in a real way the song that I hear, the message conveyed, the details and intricacies, the emotion and tension in the composition and performance. The same can definitely be said for ancient texts and religious texts. The words themselves may not change (in their original language that is, reading in translation literally does change over time), but we change and our consensus about what a particular passage means or even just says can completely and unrecognizable change over time.

You're like the perfect combination of Jreg and Plastic Pills

I think books are different from music only because of technology used. Someone composing or writing music is different than a band playing that song, (in which case digitization is actually happening in reverse, like when you read a book. But, if someone else reads to you, or you are only listening to the band not playing with them, it's the same as listening to an audiobook.) When you read a book you are doing a process continually When you play a song with an instrument you are doing a process continually When you play a record, you are starting a process that continues on its own, same as asking someone to read to you or play a song to you If we consider that everything is made of parts, that your brain and eyes reading are parts doing something without your manual input and conscious decoding of signals, (unless you have some rare mental disorder like agnosia), but the prompt given by the greater You is communicaed down into that and when you ask someone to sing for you, you and the singer are both components, while the song and the language used to request it are themselves a sort of greater thing

The background art is beautiful. Where can i get it?

could listen to this all day tbh

This is an interesting video but was really hard to watch. You would benefit greatly from more prep work and writing a script before hand / sticking to it better.

this might be exactly what i need, i might get back to it tomorrow

Neoneoplatonism 🤤

Thank you almighty algorithm - this is exactly what I needed now. I feel 6% more alive now

oh this is what i neeed........

why am I getting reccomended they/them soy boy videos

WTF did I just watch.

I feel like the fundamental difference between something real and something "digital" is primarily based on the objects relation to time. The real object is always changing, because time flows through it while a recording of the object is not changing. However a recording of an object isn't just incomplete interns of time dimension, but also in other aspects. For example, a folk tale transmitted orally is a real object, but assume that every teller never changes the story and recites it word for word in the same method of speaking - so it effectively is a recording. Although the story stays the same its meaning may drift over time with changes in cultural contexts. The meaning is part of the story that was not recorded although the words were effectively recorded. I'd argue that that the you could place the different types of objects shown in a 2d graph. An axis of of time modulated and an axis how much of various aspects are recorded. Time modulated and completely existing would be the "Real Objects" Fixed in time and existing in part would be "Recordings of Objects" Time modulated but only maintaining some of the aspects of the original would be "Reference of an object" Fixed in time and completely existing at both extremes doesn't exist in reality. idk thats just a random idea i had based on what you described

So is digitization just the process of the thing becoming an entity in the collective conscious, or it's preservation? If the latter, I don't see the difference between the digital and the actual object (both products of labour, but one finite and the other infinite). If the former, then I do believe the process is a bit more extense: This thing (an object made with a particular meaning by the author, either the copy or the original, and therefore a symbol made up of what the author wants to say and what's been created) becomes the symbol of the thing (say the album cover, which references the album), this symbol of a symbol (album cover) becomes (when digitized) the collective idea of this thing, now a symbol of "good taste" "prestige" "excelence" instead of a symbol of the object (album) itself, and this turns into the shirt/poster/object of critique. This last form isn't connected to the object itself, it is only connected to the collective idea of the object, what we all think the symbol (album cover) represents, which can deviate from what the object actually means (the album). This explanation fixes why you couldn't find a solution to the writing thing: It hasn't been digitized until there is a social idea of the symbol that represents the object. It has nothing to do with permanence in the real world, just in the collective conscious. Also brainrot level editing lmao

The intermission was a great touch lmao

Did my comment fail?

the algorithm knows me huh, good channel

Cute nerdy trans girl ramblings? Thank you algorithm!

gecgecgecgecgecgec...

Burgeois culture influencing my thought patterns? Impossible! I was born wanting to consoom McDonald's! This "goop" and "slop" system is relative to the internal critical perspective of a person: The more critical you are the more "goop" you will extract from absolutely anything. That being said, it is possible to enter an "elitist" perspective where everything becomes a goop machine and you begin pursuing the goopiest (patent pending on that word) media. It could also be argued that your critical skills depend on your knowledge of reality as well, which is influenced by media. This is true, and the reality of many is that they will never break free of all the constraints of the status quo (maybe some given enough trauma), which for some UNEXPLAINABLE reason promotes slop mentality and an aesthetic or shallow hints of gooping that pretend to be goop while actually being slop (think of any company that makes an ad pretending to give a shit about the latest socially accepted minority while exluding them from their workforce or exploiting their labour) TL;DR I am cringe but I am goop

so something like Vsauce is goop, and something like 5minute crafts is slop

23:30 ish. Other than function? What could that be? Joy?

Some men that no about some things, smart men like you think about alot of things, like men stuff and being a father, protector and provider

Youre one of the smartest dudes i know, i think other men need to take a page from your book

Som e men know the scret truths and this man is one of them, nothing better than a fresh perspective from a bro

No doubt in my mind that he has the right idea, this man is on to something!

This man knows whats up, he has it down!

This dude is cool, he has really interesting concepts

Its all good man.

Imagine being genuinely convinced that our infantile level of technology could even begin to take its first steps into understanding, let alone creating, God. The human minds that are so easily malleable at an elementary level is a testament to the overwhelming success of projects such as MK Ultra. It's difficult to even find it hilarious. It's actually quite depressing, knowing that I share the same human genome as individuals who are utterly incapable of forming any logical thought process without fictional entertainment coercing their weak mental fortitude. I will pray for you my guy.

You obviously crucified me