i was originally gonna include bits from other episodes but there are so many thoughts in this one stream • Thought Experiments me: linktr.ee/zestoflemon thanks for watching :)
I feel like there's a bell curve of 'Knowledge of Philosophy' where in the middle you get stuck pondering the complex implications of these supposedly impossible thought experiments, but people at the Min and Max Philosophy-Brain ends both identically say, "This scenario is absurd and poorly-posited, I refuse to engage with the premise and declare it silly stupid doo-doo."
It can sometimes be frustrating. Like that super long tumblr discussion where somebody uses a metaphor based on the trolley problem to criticise working from within a system to change it and somebody keeps kicking the metaphor instead of the politics.
It’s actually the opposite. People with no philosophy knowledge treat it as a dumb little personality quiz. People with some knowledge think it’s stupid because the limited premises and obvious biases. People with a lot of philosophy knowledge derive the underlying question being posed and are able to form a valuable discourse from it.
It’s so unexpected, I wouldn’t think Julia would be the one to pull that out, plus it’s right after Karina and Jacob have already given an affable response.
I love jacobs theory about the transporter that as long as its the same molecules youre the same person becuase that means transporters dont kill you but eating food is a slow death because youre replacing the molecules youre made of one banana at a time.
If Jimin got struck by lightning and disintegrated and at the same time lightning struck a swamp and formed a perfect copy of Jimin from the particles in it, would your bias still be Jimin or would you change it to Swamp-Jimin?
@@FleursetRebellion trick question, the lightning strike would make another Jimin alongside the original Jimin. This happens every time lightning strikes the earth. That’s what the BTS army is, just a horde of Jimins led by Jimin Prime.
@@C.V317trick question, the lightning strike would lead the Jimins into having an existential crisis about who the real Jimin is and who should really be Prime Jimin, leading to the great Jimin massacre where we no longer have any more Jimins as a result.
@@small_and_dangerous2068 trick question, the winner of the Jimin War will be named the Jimin Prime of this universe and will receive an invitation from a victorious Jimin from another universe to join the League of Extraordinary Jimin to tackle threats throughout the Jimin-verse, such as an imperialist alternate earth ruled by Sonamoo.
i will say right off the bat that they don't use the transporter in every episode, so he definitely doesnt die in _every_ episode by that metric either
Related to this, we need a compliation of them reading unhinged shit from their phones. No context, just whatever absolute nonsense Karina or Julia or Jacob pull up. (This can also include the infamous "how to pee" bit from SSS.)
im taking a critical thinking class this semester and every week one of our homework assignments involves responding to a thought experiment, and the very first one we got was the pleasure machine lolol i was like oh hell yeah ive already thought about this a bunch with my blorbos
Here's a thought experiment: would Trekkies be more upset with Drawfee conflating Star Wars and two different Star Trek series, or with Drawfee improperly explaining how the transporter works? Also, how much more time would they spend explaining the transporter than they would the differences between the two series of Star Trek?
@@tylerc5021 Stargate fan here. I would argue that the transporter does kill you because it disassembles your molecules and only transmits the instructions for a new you, not the actual molecules, so you die and are rebuilt. Whereas the stargate disassembles your molecules and transports them before reassembling you, so it doesn't kill you.
Transporter doesn't transport your actual molecules, just instructions on how to reassemble another set of molecules; however I still argue that it is fundamentally different than Swamp Man because the transporter is deliberate while the lightning that creates Swamp Man is explicitly random chance.
I feel like everyone is glossing over the fact that the pleasure machine thought experiment starts by saying... super neuroscientists? Wtf is a _super_ neuroscientist????
Technically Riker's clone is a shiny as his only difference from the original Riker is he has sideburns and clone Riker doesn't. It makes for a funny reveal in a DS9 episode were the clone pretends to be Riker and removes fake sideburns when he drops the act and it's played as a massive reveal
Transport Clone Riker shows up later in an episode of Deep Space 9 in what has to be the best reveal in all of TV history. Hes pretending to be normal riker and when he takes control of the ship hes stealing he pulls off fake "side beards" to reval that his full beard was actually a goatee.
being rational is a decoy i think cause there is no “rational” decision to be made if the options are exactly the same. it’s the free will that’s the problem cause even if one hay bail was more “rational” to choose, the donkey couldn’t act on it. so it would do nothing and starve right?
It's stupid and I don't like it. The donkey either guesstimates the distance between itself and the food, or the donkey has quantom level information of its surroundings and Yes, there is absolutely no difference in distance to the atomic level. So either the donkey is choosing to believe both are the same distance(so it has free will) or the donkey should know that eventually the breeze or it's own anatomy will shorten/lengthen the distance between one or 2 of the choices and logically move to the according food source
It's entirely irrational to starve when there are two sources of food right near it. It would have to choose one, because not choosing is the most irrational choice of all. I suppose choosing on a whim could be considered free will, and I don't have an answer for that lol but I'd imagine a purely rational being would like. Not starve? If it had the opportunity to?
I have two exactly the same choices of food, but rationality doesn't allow me to make anything but the most rarional thing. Therefore, I must starve, as making a random choice is irrational. Send my children my good byes, for here I shall stay. May they also find their rational tomb as I did.
It seems like this is only a question because the first version is destroyed. If lightning struck a marsh and created an identical man, but the first man was not disintegrated, the swamp man is obviously not the first man. So why would the destruction of the first man change that status?
For the second that swamp man is created, that is the same man. But if both are alive they are now constantly experiencing different lives and because of that different people (like twins) but if original man does die while swamp man isn't him he is similar to what we would consider as an alternative universe verson of original man
19:12 i actually have thoughts on this one: no I would not, and no you should not. the people of Equim clearly have a different culture and cultural priorities than we do, and it is in no way up to me, or anyone else from Earth for that matter, to dictate their values or behaviour. Any sort of shift in cultural values should come as a result of the desires of the people within that culture, without coercion or manipulation from outsiders. However, if simple exposure to the people of Earth, or for us, exposure to the people of Equim, causes either group to reexamine their values/priorities, then that is totally fine. Learning from others and broadening your horizons is a good thing. But with a pill? that's some unethical ass shit right there.
I freaking hate the Big Bang Theory-ass "does the transporter kill you" debate, but I think Jacob's misunderstanding of how it works actually resolved the question for me The transporter is a matter-to-energy device. It breaks down the atoms of your body into energy and then uses that energy to reconstruct you somewhere else. It doesn't send the exact same atoms elsewhere - we know this, because if it did, it couldn't duplicate people. I would argue that, when it functions properly, it kind of _does_ send you and your component atoms somewhere else though It's converting you to energy and then using that energy to reassemble you somewhere else, right? So in theory, there isn't any new material entering the system like the swamp man argument. The material that makes up the transporter target is just going through a state change (matter to energy) and then that change gets reversed - the energy gets turned back into the matter it used to be - and the target gets reassembled somewhere else. If you had a block of ice, melted it, and then refroze that water in the same mold, I don't know if it'd make sense to say it's a "different" block of ice when it's made out of the exact same molecules
Star Trek does a long song and dance to explain how traasnporters don't kill you but they're just assuming that consciousness exists as some magical part of your physical body that magically gets transported with it while it's dismantled and turned into energy. . .
the issue of transporters makes much more sense if you know more about it 😭 iirc how (theoritical proposed) transporters work is they don't actually move the molecules of your body, they force a bunch of random other molecules to become identical to your molecules, and in the process destroy all your current molecules. its got a similar idea to it as the memes of "when you observe quantum particles they cease to exist" - by measuring your molecules, you have to destroy them edit: screaming JACOB NOO at my screen rn
i have to take a break from the pleasure machine and pop in the bad machine every week or so for the pleasure machine to stay pleasurable (the pleasure machine is taking vyvanse)
3:19 see you later Midnight Gospel cowboy 3:49 “no free will and always acts in the most (ir)rational way?” This is why u don’t discuss animal awareness with people who think that because animals are amoral they somehow don’t have free will. That’s. That’s sapience. And humans have a very biased understanding of what we consider sapience. I hope the person who pitched a question phrased that way, and the person who wrote “why does the boy help the mouse,” 5:13😂 6:02 Karina puts her whole hand on the neoliberal stovetop, 6:17 Julia explains one of the bluntest reasons for collectivist support and she’s not technically wrong 6:37 and comrade jacob contributes to the water cycling of his friends 7:24 hypothetical: what if you were struck by lightning and were reconstructed as Shrek miles away in a swamp with a perfect copy of you with all your thoughts and memories is that you or a clone of you 8:57 NO ITS NOT THE EXACT SAME MOLECULES but it literally *_doesn’t matter_* because *_ALL MOLECULES ARE THE SAME OG MOLECULES_* god ain’t that the shit 💖 11:21 Pleasure Eurable’s Experiences (honking) 12:08 bad and naughty antihumanists go into the pleasure eurbal machine while normal not fascist people can just like burn with emotion and poke each other in the face and be cool with a natural death 🤗 14:24 I don’t know how to explain why but this feels like a House of Leaves 15:18 fuck it up farmer Ted🥲 16:06 an old suitcase full of mud “Equim” question guy is a person I would force to comprehend Kyuubey (it’s not just the Bible, it’s the neoliberal Bible which is so much weirder it’s like if you explained how most people feel a general collective empathy and then are taught to unlearn it to the guy asking the question and he just looked at you like the ICJ and said “well you see but no and assume I am inherently already correct actually” the thought experiment is flawed at its foundation because the question it’s asking is being asked in a way where it can’t mean anything- 22:00 this is just both aspects of Christ again