I'm a philosophy student that tends to post about really serious things unseriously and about really unserious things seriously.
I was once described as a "beautiful, intelligent iguana".
Oh god, I’m going to gripe about an essay more, because what else is Tumblr for?
This is a summary paragraph I just wrote:
At this point, it would be prudent to review some of the claims made in this paper, because some of the following claims rest on them. First, following Meillassoux, I claimed that the majority of post-Kantian philosophy has been correlationist, and thus has run into problems in being able to properly adapt itself to Events in the sciences - namely, accounts of emergence that have arisen from the domain of complexity science. I then went on to study a specific case of an emergent object - consciousness - in the works of both Searle and Johnston. I wound up claiming that consciousness is ‘emergent2’, immaterial, and immanent to the interactions of lower-level factors, and ‘larger’ immanent ones. Then, in the last paragraph, I claimed that since consciousness is immaterial, it can both retain its nonpresence and interact causally with other objects only if it is considered an object as well, and is consider as both part and whole at the same time. It’s from this end of a heavily qualified view of a type of emergence that I’d like to show consciousness (and any sort of object exhibiting similar qualities) challenges traditional metaphysical views in the ‘Modern’ philosophical tradition.
Now it’s time to discuss free will, physicalism/materialism, and correlationism. Ugh.