Amanda Diva

So you’re prolly like, “WHERE’D THIS BROAD GO!?”  I know I have been irresponsibly absent.  But I BEEN GETTIN IT IN!  I’ll be back on my steez soon folks:)

 

[ahh philosophy humor…they’re not know for their jokes for a reason]

As we continue on with these philosophy questions I see why the philosophy majors in school were always so weird.  Getting in your head is some bugged shit!

Yesterday’s question was

2. ARE YOU THE SAME PERSON WHO STARTED READING THIS ARTICLE?

Hmm I’m a lil stumped on this one.  Because yes, it is about how you define “person” but I think there is a dichotomy in the definition.  Basically there’s the literal and the figurative.  The literal is the body in its visceral form, organs, bones, etc.  The figurative is the experiences, education, etc that only exists through the neurological connections in the brain.  (I’m boring myself as I type this)  Bottom line, I’m the same literal person I was when I started reading it but I’m a different figurative person cause, well, like one’s figure, the figurative is ALWAYS changing!  Just my thoughts!

Aight next one:

3. IS THAT REALLY A COMPUTER SCREEN IN FRONT OF YOU?

What reason do you have to believe there’s a computer screen in front of you? Presumably that you see it, or seem to. But our senses occasionally mislead us. A straight stick half-submerged in water sometimes look bent; two equally long lines sometimes look different lengths.

Are things always as they seem? The Muller-Lyer illusion indicates not

But this, you might reply, doesn’t show that the senses cannot provide good reasons for beliefs about the world. By analogy, even an imperfect barometer can give you good reason to believe it’s about to rain.

Before relying on the barometer, after all, you might independently check it by going outside to see whether it tends to rain when the barometer indicates that it will. You establish that the barometer is right 99% of the time. After that, surely, its readings can be good reasons to believe it will rain.

Perhaps so, but the analogy fails. For you cannot independently check your senses. You cannot jump outside of the experiences they provide to check they’re generally reliable. So your senses give you no reason at all to believe that there is a computer screen in front of you.”

What is this the frickin Matrix??  “There is no spoon…”

 

Yesterday was World Philosophy Day and we started a series of questions (that I got off the BBC News) to examine ya’lls philosophy .

The first was “Should we kill healthy people for their organs?”

In my opinion absolutely not.  I understand they may have healthy organs that can save the lives of 5 people but it’s their organs!  They have a right to live out their usage!  Folks talk about Bams being a socialist damn imagine the outrage if we started “spreading organs around!”  DOOZIE!   Anywhoo, here’s question 2:

2. ARE YOU THE SAME PERSON WHO STARTED READING THIS ARTICLE?

Consider a photo of someone you think is you eight years ago. What makes that person you? You might say he she was composed of the same cells as you now. But most of your cells are replaced every seven years. You might instead say you’re an organism, a particular human being, and that organisms can survive cell replacement - this oak being the same tree as the sapling I planted last year.

But are you really an entire human being? If surgeons swapped George Bush’s brain for yours, surely the Bush look-alike, recovering from the operation in the White House, would be you. Hence it is tempting to say that you are a human brain, not a human being.

But why the brain and not the spleen? Presumably because the brain supports your mental states, eg your hopes, fears, beliefs, values, and memories. But then it looks like it’s actually those mental states that count, not the brain supporting them. So the view is that even if the surgeons didn’t implant your brain in Bush’s skull, but merely scanned it, wiped it, and then imprinted its states on to Bush’s pre-wiped brain, the Bush look-alike recovering in the White House would again be you.

But the view faces a problem: what if surgeons imprinted your mental states on two pre-wiped brains: George Bush’s and Gordon Brown’s? Would you be in the White House or in Downing Street? There’s nothing on which to base a sensible choice. Yet one person cannot be in two places at once.

In the end, then, no attempt to make sense of your continued existence over time works. You are not the person who started reading this article.

[This is some bugged out shit!!!  Dig deep folks!]

 

I thought this was rather interesante:

The singer — who told DJ Skee in a separate interview that artists such as Ron Browz have used the Auto-Tune effect poorly — told MTV News that his biters need to pay up. Hey, if Diddy can collaborate with Pain and pay him for using the Auto-Tune, so can you other guys.

“I gave T-Pain one point on my [upcoming] album for using the Auto-Tune,” Diddy revealed on Sunday night during “Total Finale Live.”

“Sign the papers,” advised Pain, who also worked on his friend Kanye West’s 808’s & Heartbreak. “Diddy actually gave me royalties on this album just for using Auto-Tune. He signed the contract and everything. If I can do that with Diddy, somebody else better be signing something. It’s Diddy. He didn’t have to involve me at all. … I’m writing and producing on his album, and he gave me extra royalties on top of that for using something I just brought back.”

I’m not quite sure if I agree or disagree.  What do you think?  Should T-Pain be entitled to royalties for others whos work utilizes auto-tune?  {the “electronica” effect folks like him, Ron Browz, and now Kanyeezy have been using on their vocals as of late}  What do you think!?