*chorus of begrudging punk approval*

I was so chuffed with my own good taste until I got to Metal Machine Music and the rage kicked in

Your honour, I contend that in order that the foundational relation R stand between A and B, there must be a further relation R’ relation R to A.

and i think that may be the fundamental difference between philosophy of science and basically all of philosophy of mind

They talk about the “combination problem” as almost literally a co-ordination problem between miniature souls, rather than a hanging explanandum: if ‘consciousness’ is like *this* (love, fear, etc.), then what in the first place do oodles of tiny qualia do to explain that?

you could particularly feel that vague miasma whenever he (or someone similar) started explaining that if you thought of the universe as conscious you might treat it differently What’s that you say? It’s *that* it’s conscious, not *how* it feels that matters? Even if it’s only a teeny bit?

goff was always a re-enchantment blowhard, you heard it here first, and when the juice ran out on quantum woo he made the jump Some respect for that. Not a great deal, because he’s an arse. But some respect for it.

actually i didn’t block him, i just keep getting mad when other people post his worst takes onto my tl

Same

But it is! It makes it worse! It’s a grossly unsubtle attempt at synthesis! The distinguishing feature of bothsideism is the demand that a settlement be found between two points, whereas this is a classically English path-finding method: sanding off corners to reach an even crazier conclusion