Status Updates From Filosofía de lo inconsciente
Filosofía de lo inconsciente by
Status Updates Showing 1-30 of 31
Erick
is on page 160 of 1148
The experiments they were doing on animals in the 19th century I find incredibly disturbing. This would now be considered the behavior of serial killers in the making.
— Sep 25, 2020 12:48PM
Add a comment
M
is on page 241 of 1150
I wonder what Hartmann would have thought about DNA.
— May 03, 2020 09:28AM
Add a comment
M
is on page 111 of 1150
Probably the most entertaining description of the Will I've seen in a text, thanks to the sheer wealth and breadth of knowledge Hartmann displays. Especially enjoyed his examples of animals who act wilfully despite their cerebellum being destroyed, as well as his description of ant war. If only all German philosophers could be so entertaining. Looking at YOU, Heidegger.
— May 03, 2020 07:55AM
Add a comment
M
is on page 90 of 1150
"The probability, therefore, of a spiritual cause being required for the sum of conditions = 0.746, i.e., almost. In truth, however, the several probabilities perhaps = 0.25, or at the most 0.5, and accordingly the probability of a spiritual cause for the whole = 0.9999985 or 0.99988, i.e., certainty."
Mathematics just doesn't get abused like this enough anymore
— May 03, 2020 06:24AM
Add a comment
Mathematics just doesn't get abused like this enough anymore
M
is on page 88 of 1150
Having a blast. Hartmann just mathematically "proved" that spiritual causes must be admitted as having an effect on reality. MATERIALISTS DESTROYED WITH FACTS AND LOGIC.
— May 03, 2020 06:08AM
Add a comment
M
is on page 82 of 1150
Begins with a sweeping review of the idea of the "Unconscious" as it has appeared in Western philosophy, with a brief diversion to look at Hinduism, and an interesting examination of the Weber–Fechner law as it pertains to conscious and unconscious perception. Reminded me of the start of Interpretation of Dreams where Freud examines all the dream literature.
— May 03, 2020 05:38AM
Add a comment
M
is 5% done
Hegelianism is a no-no, and the deductive method is way out. Time to get inductive.
— May 02, 2020 01:31PM
Add a comment





