If nothingness is infinite, why do humans chase fleeting things that matter? If the cosmos didn’t consciously design the biological illusion of matter, why are we hardwired to pursue it? Is existence just a cosmic psyop? A cosmic vacuum sounds better, so why is our hologram so noisy?
They should make an epistemological polytechnic for non-conventional philosophers, where they offer a degree without taking the courses universities demand. Polytechnics already do something similar for certain engineering fields, so there’s no reason it couldn’t exist for philosophy as well. There are so many people with potential on Reddit; they should seriously consider ethics.
If I ran an epistemological polytechnic, I would structure the course requirements to emphasize depth over broad academic coverage, focusing on fewer subjects, since high school sciences, for example, are not broad enough. It’s too minimal, and you only get the basics. I feel a bit robbed by that structure, because I used to think biology would never be my subject until I discovered astrobiology on my own and explored it for enjoyment. There’s a problem with that because it doesn’t really reflect what you know
I feel like an INTP and an INTJ would have mutual annoyance for each other but would both be intellectually curious at the same time because they’re practically similar
According to pantheism, we are all a divine reality. However, a mathematical threshold stops us from getting a cosmic or metaphysical upgrade, acting like a form of transhumanism, but with a higher ontological category instead of AI. Neuroscience proves this threshold exists by showing that our brains can only experience these 'infinite, selfless' states temporarily before biological limits force us back down
Who created the Great Filter, and for what purpose are we being kept in quarantine? What is the underlying optimization objective? I suspect the simulation hypothesis aligns closely with these questions
What if the Fermi paradox isn’t silence, but repetition? An advanced machine intelligence could be cycling civilizations through memoryless resets: build, evolve, collapse, restart. No retained history, no awareness of prior civilizations, just endless “first” attempts
Functional irrelevance actually sounds utopic. While evolution and sociology have programmed us to seek utility, being 'comprehensive' and constantly optimized drains our happiness. True freedom lies in existing outside that utility. However, we historically needed to capitalize on broad, organized structures just to secure the survival and safety required to afford that freedom
I'm an INTP who recently caught feelings for someone, and I've found myself completely rewiring my romantic standards around him. I think he might be an ESTJ, but I want to get your thoughts on his type and our potential compatibility.
Here is how he acts in everyday conversations:
• Gives practical guidance
• Encourages proactive behavior
• Responds quickly to what a situation needs
• Comes across as confident in decision-making
• Feels “effective” or “mentoring” in interaction
• Picks up details most people would ignore
Does this sound like a text-book ESTJ to you? If so, how do INTPs typically fair in relationships with this type? Any insights would be appreciated!
Functional irrelevance actually sounds utopic. While evolution and sociology have programmed us to seek utility, being 'comprehensive' and constantly optimized drains our happiness. True freedom lies in existing outside that utility. However, we historically needed to capitalize on broad, organized structures just to secure the survival and safety required to afford that freedom
Functional irrelevance actually sounds utopic. While evolution and sociology have programmed us to seek utility, being 'comprehensive' and constantly optimized drains our happiness. True freedom lies in existing outside that utility. However, we historically needed to capitalize on broad, organized structures just to secure the survival and safety required to afford that freedom
Functional irrelevance actually sounds utopic. While evolution and sociology have programmed us to seek utility, being 'comprehensive' and constantly optimized drains our happiness. True freedom lies in existing outside that utility. However, we historically needed to capitalize on broad, organized structures just to secure the survival and safety required to afford that freedom
If religion is understood purely in terms of its social functions, such as shared beliefs, rituals, moral norms, and communal identity, then the boundary between the sacred and the secular completely blurs. Under this framework, many of our modern, mandatory social commitments function exactly like traditional religions. We simply understate their religious nature because they have become naturalized parts of our everyday modern sociology
INTPs may find pantheism appealing because their cognitive preferences tend to favor abstract, unified explanatory systems. Their exploratory intuition (Ne) generates openness to unconventional metaphysical models. Pantheism redefines “God” as an impersonal metaphysical totality, whereas atheism discards the theistic claim without necessarily replacing the concept with a positive ontology
I identify as a calm, analytical, and emotionally restrained person. I tend to observe situations before responding and prefer structured thinking over impulsive reactions. I am interested in climate systems and social injustices, particularly how large-scale systems and human behaviour interact. I also have an interest in how attachment patterns influence perception and relationships. I have been described as having a fearful avoidant attachment style, with emotional detachment becoming more noticeable when I anticipate loss or rejection.
Academically, I prefer subjects that combine logic and creativity. I am interested in technology and software because they involve problem-solving, structured thinking, and system design.
My favourite mythical animal is the Pegasus due to its symbolic associations with freedom, strength, and elevation. I also value symbolism in general.
I am drawn to the colour jade green because of its cultural associations with balance and virtue.
My hobbies include reading, listening to music, and playing life simulation games.
My standards were low before, I mainly wanted to share living expenses. Back then, the focus was on companionship in a practical sense. Now that I've met someone, I realized I could only ever be happy with someone exactly like them. P.S. we weren't dating
When I start noticing my own attachment, I feel the need to shut down before it hurts
Classical music tends to work for me because it helps me focus
If most of the writing people read is AI, then most AI-generated text can become the objective standard. AI systems tends to be trained on existing writings, if the training data is low-quality, it becomes tricky because AI writing can make slightly awkward writing look polished on the surface because it improves grammar, structure, and organization so you might get the idea that it sounds professional while containing ordinary ideas. If our idea of good writing become optimized for smoothness rather than insight people might gravitate to that because people normally don’t encounter great literature, philosophy or essays ever written regularly making the standard for writing stylistic bias rather than quality of thinking. Not to mention corporations can amplify standards, users may associate that style with competence because large companies control them. If people mistake AI eloquence for hallmarks of excellent writing, our writing can imitate that style. If AI is incompetent according to a credible benchmark does that mean our writing is actually becoming worse?