>Gee whiz, unraping all those girls AND solving world hunger sure was tough
>I sure hope nothing bad happens to my perfect world
>Gee whiz, unraping all those girls AND solving world hunger sure was tough
>Gee whiz, unraping all those girls AND solving world hunger sure was tough
>I sure hope nothing bad happens to my perfect world
>i'm gonna remove free will and ur gonna like it
There's no such thing as true free will. Every action you've taken and will ever take is the result of your upbringing and environment.
is that what you tell yourself when you're sucking all that dick?
>DNA and your frontal lobe don't matter because... because they just don't ok?!
They do, but nurture trumps nature any day. Why do you think most crimes are committed by people who grow up in a shitty household?
>They do
stopped reading there as I see we are in agreement that nature does matter after all, despite your initial insistence otherwise
Where did I say that it didn't matter at all?
>Every action you've taken and will ever take is the result of your upbringing and environment.
^ right here
Then I have to correct what I said. Replace "every" with "most" and that's more accurate to what I meant.
While that remains disputed and up for debate, I'm happy to say we are in agreement now.
Experience does not negate choice. You're just regurgitating basic philosophy.
what the shit does this mean
Just because you got raped doesn't mean you have no choices to make.
the most masturbatory nonsense in all of philosophy
>there's no free will bro!
oh it's all quantifiable processes, inputs and outputs right?
>yeah that's right!
okay, quantify them.
>uh... we can't...
oh, well will we ever be able to quantify them?
>umm... p-probably not
I see... so is there any difference between unquantifiable determinism and free will other than "I'm not responsible for my decisions?"
>s-shut up!
this is the tl;dr for every single one of these conversations. don't be one of these homosexuals.
>literally plugging your ears and going "LALALALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU!"
cope and seethe you fricking whelp
>This is a pretty petty way to denigrate something you find uncomfortable.
it's not uncomfortable, it's huffing your own farts
there are zero people who fully commit to determinism that are not reprehensible gays
>The lack of transcendental moral responsibility grounded in some nebulous notion of free will does undermine notions of morality that seek to place blame on the individual.
it literally does, moron. if outcomes are both predetermined and unpredictable you cannot have a framework of personal responsibility- let alone autonomy. these things are mutually exclusive.
>But I think the "i'm not responsible for my decisions" thing is cope.
It is, that's why I called determinists homosexuals.
>By the same metric an induvial can simply internally defer blame by holding onto the comfortable lie, the one where they tell themselves that if they were given another chance they would conduct themselves differently.
Are you trying to call 'learning from your mistakes' a cope? Are you mentally well?
>rejecting free will forces you to acknowledge that your actions are an immutable reflection of who you are as a person.
No, anon. Rejecting free will forces you to acknowledge that "who you are as a person" is immutable and that you have no agency to change yourself.
>ere are zero people who fully commit to determinism that are not reprehensible gays
Ad hominem isn't an argument, and your reading comprehension skills are embarrassingly bad.
>Ad hominem isn't an argument
this is how I know you're a midwit btw
ad hominem necessitates replacing an argument with an insult, or implying a causal link between the insult and the conclusion (e.g. you are a gay gay therefore you are wrong)
merely insulting someone is not ad hominem, you are just insulting someone
further example- you do not understand what ad hominem is, so you are a midwit. this is not an example of ad hominem, because you are a midwit _due to_ your inability to understand something simple
hope this helps!
This is a pretty petty way to denigrate something you find uncomfortable. The lack of transcendental moral responsibility grounded in some nebulous notion of free will does undermine notions of morality that seek to place blame on the individual.
But I think the "i'm not responsible for my decisions" thing is cope. By the same metric an induvial can simply internally defer blame by holding onto the comfortable lie, the one where they tell themselves that if they were given another chance they would conduct themselves differently. By contrast, rejecting free will forces you to acknowledge that your actions are an immutable reflection of who you are as a person.
in this anon's mind, us telling him that he's huffing his own farts was inevitable, so he never has to consider ceasing his fart-huffing because it's not his responsibility to change his behavior
You're a moron.
this is absolute fact and humanity just wants to believe this isn't true so that they can feel special, or feel like they are in control.
except you should have included DNA as mentioned here since it's further solidifies the lack of free will. the frontal lobe changes nothing. your decisions are all a cascade of the events leading up to that point. you are not in control, you are a machine that reacts to stimuli in an extremely complicated but methodical manner.
free will gays are delusional you can't reason with them
Oh shut up you pedantic gay.
"There's no such thing as true free will so you should have none whatsoever" is the most moron bungling dipshit argument ever stated.
We are completely in control of our actions save for some rare mental conditions, because the conciousness is all there is. Its all a matter of what youre willing to do or not.
Materialists are moronic.
>We are completely in control of our actions save for some rare mental conditions, because the conciousness is all there is. Its all a matter of what youre willing to do or not.
>Materialists are moronic.
Are you though? Would you have even bothered to post this refutation without him having first posted something to refute?
Everything that we know about the universe overwhelmingly points to this being the case.
Thing is we know dick about how the universe works. Can't even explain consciousness.
Well I'll be open to changing my mind but for now we have to work with what we do know..
add genetics in and you're correct
How would you feel if you didn't have breakfast this morning?
KYS, israelite
The keyword here was “TRUE” free will, and this anon is 100% correct.
Who we are and our actions are just chemical reactions and most of them are products of environment and genetic lottery.
>inb4 mickey mouse le perish like a dog meme
Yup. True free will is only possible if there's an afterlife that wholly absolves you of your worldly views and shaping as a person, instead granting true enlightenment to the full nature of the universe that allows you to fully take actions for yourself in a manner that is undeniably coming from (You) down to the very core of your soul.
But since we have no clue what comes after death or if there even are higher powers at play, the degree of free will we have is the best we'll ever get until death claims us to show what truly waits beyond the veil of mortality.
>But since we have no clue what comes after death
the most scientifically logical answer is that it is exactly the same as what it was like before you were born
nothing
non-existence
>my completely heckin infallible BASEDence and human LOGIC says you that non existence is permanent doods!
>even though there is no such thing as an eternity except for constant change itself
>even though it makes no sense for you to be even exist right now if permanent non-existence is even a thing
between all sides arguing right now this is one of the dumbest posts. I'm sorry we all had to see this
get therapy homie, try to get into better environments
oh fricking wait thanks for reminding me to get out of Ganker wtf was i doing here
>upbringing and environment
Genes come before both
Being a 6 feet tall white man won't stop a buffed homie from beating you to a pulp.
>the troon brings up their racial fetish out of nowhere
>Being a 6 feet tall white man won't stop a buffed homie from bea-PLAP PLAP PLAP ACKKKK
>All the anons here deflecting from the issue by accusing you of nihilism when the guy you were responding to was the one who tried to use free will as an argumentative point
So much seethe caused by one post, midwits can't accept the truth it seems
then why are you posting here slave?
Just shut the frick UP you fedora wearing c**t
Ask yourself this philosophical question: why is there even "something", rather than "nothing"? If you can't offer a logically scientific explanation to the dead end of why the absolute beginning can come from "nothing", then you lost the argument.
>Le burden of proof fallacy
The truth is nobody fricking knows. That's how the religions were born.
>noooooo fatalistic determinism is the reason I let myself get scammed by Dr. Goldberg to lop my dick off
Wow. A lot of people sure called me a moron. I better samegay reply to myself a bunch of times claiming people are seething to seem like I'm not butthurt.
Scientifically wrong. Check out what happens in your neurons microtubules.
Based Penrose dabbing on pascal’s demon with quantum mechanics.
The latest experiments are in favor of his thesis.
Refuted by this
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestrated_objective_reduction
>They hated him because he told them the truth
ok, samegay
>He is so terrified at the prospect of not being a special little boy with undefined magic powers that he assumes every new IP must be the same guy
I'm trans btw
Humans don't value their free will, if they did they wouldn't be so quick to surrender it to political ideologies, religions, teachers, scientists, etc.
It's not a perfect world as I don't want any human above other humans lives even if it does solve every other problem. The fact he fails me, is enough for him to be overthrown.
We make it together with our bonds and efforts or we perish and suffer together.
>WHAT?! You guys don't like my prison?! Even though I'm keeping all the inmates well fed and safe!
>no free will
I'm going to be self destructive and you're going to watch me ruin my life you golden homosexual
Should've just let Kamoshida continue beating and raping his students, then, seeing as muh free will is apparently more important than an orderly and happy society.
They were literally asking for it. He was an athlete. It's only afterward when they regretted it that it became "rape".
True. This bawd was asking for it
No wonder kamoshida fricked her
>what's that? your lifelong dream is PAINTING?
>NO SIR, we can't have that!
>you're going to become an archer, because, uhhh... you're just gonna be an archer, okay?
Unraped women means the number of incels goes up, sounds like your "utopia" is the true dystopia
not unrapped, brainwashed to not remember she was raped
what are people actually referring to when they associate him with rape, out of curiosity?
Shiho is raped by kamoshida in the first palace. In the utopia kamoshida doesnt abuse his authority and rape her.
He quite literally alters people's pasts so that they were never raped.
Shiho wasn't raped. Kamoshida just got angry and kept beating her like a punching bag and she couldn't take the physical abuse anymore .
He dont rape her, but he surely touch her, thats when she decided to kill herself
Shiho was beaten and abused long before that point, and it's extremely fricking pointed that Kamoshida "went way too far this time" and she decided suicide in a manner that would get as much attention as possible to force authority to look into it was every much as obvious as a Japanese medium could allow it to be. Or did you not at all touch the Ann confidant whatsoever that beat you over the head with it in case you were unwilling to see it?
I think you need to go back and confront your coomer head canon with the actual script.
Not that guy but anon, he was constantly trying to make moves on Ann. You don't think he sexually assaulted Shiho? It's been a long time since I've played P5 but I think the context was pretty clear considering how all the girls in his Palace were dressed.
>Kamoshida's Will Seed is Lust
>Nah bro he just punched her
The Phantom Thieves are hypocrites, making a huge deal about overcoming your problems with your own strength when they know full well that their lives would've been irreparably fricked had they not gained access to a supernatural power.
The game tries to get the player to believe that 'might makes right' is just a cope evil adults use to justify their actions, while using their power to influence cognition (might) to change people's distorted desires by force (make right).
Sorry but we have to keep the past the same
If Alexstrasza can break out at any time and only does so because she heard that shit's fricked outside and will keep chilling if you fix it for her, doesn't that mean she likes being in the rape dungeon?
Um, blizzard???
Thanks, Maruki for getting rid of this cancer that was eating half of my face. I hope nobody reverses everything because they want to feel better about themselves.
I feel like at that point you ought to just become the phantom of the opera in real life
So why doesn't Maruki just fix major issues like that instead of forcefully brainwashing everyone wholesale?
he was altering the collective unconsciousness of humanity
that's why everyone was living in his reality
>he changes reality
>actually he's just brainwashing them
I'd tell you to make up your damn minds but what I said applies to both scenarios
Why completely change/brainwash everyone into different realities when he can just change that of the most egregious sufferers? There's no reason to completely rewrite paths for people who are just kind of annoyed with minor issues in life.
>There's no reason to completely rewrite paths for people who are just kind of annoyed with minor issues in life.
Exactly, but he did it anyway.
Which makes him moronic and justifies why people would view his "perfect" world as anything but
B-B-B-BUT I REALLY WANT TO DATE THIS GIRL AHHHH MARUKI SAVE MEEEEE
The reason everyone gradually gets changed over the course of him mastering his powers is because humanity is interlinked in such a way that changing one person's life will inevitably result in a chain reaction that requires even more people to be adjusted for the alteration to be wholly convincing and organic-feeling, and eventually that gets to a point where you need to adjust all of mankind, both past and present, in order to succeed.
That was the ultimate goal of Maruki getting full power, to be able to effortlessly solve the lives of those who suffer the most without inviting more suffering via people who notice something's amiss and causing a panic of mismatched memories and people stirring others back into the reality they were formerly a part of just by being stubborn about details that aren't synchronized.
And unlike when Joker does it to his party members, those people won't have the luxury of being softened and eased when their dream reality is broken, they'll be utterly mindfricked to a permanently scarring degree.
Which made his "perfect" world imperfect and sounds like he has a lot less control than he's supposed to.
And thus, that brings us to the point that he basically blundered when he invited Joker to view his WIP reality to decide whether or not he should be allowed to remain in power.
Had he waited until he was in total control, he would have presented a far better argument.
which further shows his judgement isn't fit to be master and commander of all reality
If he just waited until he was in perfect control then why bother presenting it to Joker in the first place instead of just mindraping him? Why does he feel the need to seek out a high schooler and ask them what they think of his world. If it were perfect he wouldn't need or care about some high school b***h's opinion. Maruki was an insecure c**t that secretly didn't have enough belief in himself if he really needed that sort of attention or confirmation.
Because Joker is a Wild Card, an ultimate power that can literally weaponize mankind's collective deadly sins that were meant to be weighed against him and fire them right back at its sender, Yaldabaoth, a god who surpassed even some of Philemon's finest creations (Igor and the Velvet Attendants).
He will ALWAYS be in control of his own destiny unless he chooses to relinquish it, which is why him and Akechi were the only people in Maruki's reality who were wholly aware something was amiss and had the willpower to actually seek out the source of these oddities instead of scratching their heads until Maruki's growing power pacified them.
That doesn't answer why Maruki even gave you the option and asked you to join his reality instead of just waiting to do it by force.
Maruki respected Joker too much to treat him like everyone else since he only gains the confidence to go this route if you finished his confidant.
sounds like hubris to me
if he thought Joker was going to be onboard why even bother asking, that or he just wanted to show off
seems like he doesn't know people as well as he thinks he does
how would (you) improve his looks?
keep it vydia
Augmentation.
Dr.Steinman from Rapture's plastic surgery clinic.
Persona 5 really is shit. They had to fricking rerelease the game with a new villain and it still can't match something as simple as Adachi.
yes, dear. I can remember you again. I can remember everything, the children, our lives together. My mind is back. imagine how bad it would be if I had to forget all of you again and die a confused old man shitting myself. Thank goodness for Maruki.
Thanks Joker!
it was actually going to be real. he was rewriting reality.
>get the true ending
>hate it
>reload my save to accept his deal
>get the bad ending
>feel infinitely more satisfied
there is absolutely nothing wrong with escapism and i fully support maruki
>muh free will
so because a MINUTE 0.00000000000001% of the population don't like something, that somehow makes them justified for ruining a perfect utopia for billions? frick them, the selfish c**ts
The irony is you spent 200 hours playing persona to escape from your own life. Who wouldn’t take Marukis deal? Only Hollywood writers pretend their pain and suffering makes them unique and interesting.
Why wear such moronic gear?
>Why wear such moronic gear?
Adam Kadmon
Not an answer
Everything in Persona looks like it's designed for standardless muppets and I'm tired of you all pretending otherwise
um, sorry starving children, people with cancer, raped people, abused children. We phantom Thieves prefer the old world so back it goes!
>um, sorry starving children, people with cancer, raped people, abused children. We phantom Thieves prefer the old world so back it goes!
>so because a MINUTE 0.00000000000001% of the population don't like something, that somehow makes them justified for ruining a perfect utopia for billions?
Yes. Frick NPCs. This world is carried on the backs of enterprising free thinkers, not the drooling masses. There is a reason the world looks up to giants like Benjamin Franklin or Nikola Tesla.
>This world is carried on the backs of enterprising free thinkers, not the drooling masses.
and look where that has got us
global warming, covid, science deniel, rampant corruption in politics
overall, reality is fricking dogshit
a reality where no has to suffer, and everyone can be happy - what exactly is bad with that?
>global warming
lol. You think this is truly a pressing issue? The masses are indeed idiotic.
>covid
how is this caused by free thinkers?
>science deniel
poor grammar aside, "science denial" is in a way an oxymoron since science thrives on theories and findings being challenged
>rampant corruption in politics
the Greats such as Franklin have fought tooth and nail against these kinds of issues, but again I don't see how corruption is a result of great people helping to raise the stock of life
>overall, reality is fricking dogshit
always has been, but Man has crafted amazing ways of distracting from that fact.
>a reality where no has to suffer, and everyone can be happy - what exactly is bad with that?
that can already be achieved with drugs but I don't see people opting for that very often. The truth is that the pain and suffering of reality provides the baseline from which happiness and enjoyment springs out. If you were always happy, happiness would lose its meaning.
NTA but you are the definition of a pseud. Huge moron but you think you're a genius.
when did I say I think I'm a genius? I'm absolutely a moron, I just don't delude myself otherwise like most
>when did I say I think I'm a genius?
see:
>The masses are indeed idiotic.
You think you're above the masses when you're not.
You also think you know better than actual scientists who have actually worked hard and studied and built their findings on the backs of those before them. You have a reddit libertarian understanding of "science" which is not based in the material world but on what makes you feel enlightened by your own intelligence.
>I just don't delude myself otherwise like most
lol, you are deluding yourself right now.
I'm part of the masses. I realize most people are fricking idiots. But as I'm not like the Greats who have made massive strides to better the life of all people, I can only look up to them like everybody else.
>You also think you know better than actual scientists who have actually worked hard and studied and built their findings on the backs of those before them
>lumping all scientists into a single pile as if they all agree or disagree on all issues
are you one of those people who talk about "the science"?
>lumping all scientists into a single pile as if they all agree or disagree on all issues
On climate change the consensus is 99%-100%.
Again you are appealing to a reddit libertarian understanding of science where science is just an empty void with enlightenened independent "free-thinkers" (what you call "the Greats") floating around using their big brains to science it up. That's not how it works.
>On climate change the consensus is 99%-100%.
Cook et all has been formally debunked numerous times.
Anon I really don't want to rehash mid-00s climate denial oil lobbyist bullshit with you.
Again, your understanding of science is wrong, it's that simple. It's not about "the Greats", it's about a lot of people thanklessly slaving away doing research and studies to figure shit out, which builds up over time and provides a foundation for future scientists. This foundation has led to our current scientific understandings, including climate change. Saying it's been "deboonked" by libertarians who are funded by fossil fuel companies is meaningless to me, I spit on it, it is dirt.
>mid-00s climate denial oil lobbyist bullshit with you
Cook et al being a scam paper is not "oil lobbyist bullshit," anon.
Arguing with you is so tiresome honestly. You don't put forward good-faith positions, you hide behind a wall and take potshots. I'm not gonna chase after you and try to get you to commit. We're done.
>matters little
It matters a lot actually.
>consensus used to be 99.99% that the Earth was the center of the universe until Galileo
Not true, we knew as far back as the Greeks. At best it was a centuries-spanning debate, it was never 99.99%.
The logic that "we don't know everything therefore we know nothing" is moronic on its face.
>what do you mean when you say that there is a 99-100% consensus on it?
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966
>I'm not saying climate change isn't real, all I'm saying is that it really isn't a pressing issue.
bruh New York City looked like fricking Blade Runner 2049 and just had the worst air quality in the world by a huge margin, what are you talking about? That is our future.
The average global temperature is rising, wildfires are increasing, heatwaves are increasing, the arctic is melting, ocean levels are rising, crop cycles are being disrupted, oxygen levels in the ocean are decreasing, fish are dying, etc etc. It is fricking up our way of life.
>Most scientists don't think there is a world ending climate change threat looming over the world although certain groups with vested interests constantly try to paint such a picture.
This is the most ridiculous part about climate denial. People who care about climate have "vested interests" yet somehow oil companies with billions of dollars in profit at stake don't. It's backwards.
>Do you not agree that great thinkers like Nikola Tesla, Galileo Galilei and Benjamin Franklin have raised the stock of life with their hard work and research?
I'm not saying they had no impact, but all of their work was built on the backs of others. Science is not simply Ubermensch popping ideas out of their foreheads, it's been a long chain of hard work and cooperation.
>Arguing with you is so tiresome honestly.
That was my first reply to you ITT, and it happens to be completely true. See
It seems to me that you are afraid of the implications of actually reading the papers you cite, and are pre-emptively running away from the conversation to avoid concession on this point. Good luck with that attitude, anon, I'm sure it won't bite you in the ass eventually.
You are clinging to one study that you insist has been debunked and ignoring everything else. That's what I mean about you taking potshots, you think that if you just hyperfocus on one "weak point" then the whole foundation will crumble. I'm not gonna follow you down the rabbit hole, I know you will post links from wattsupwiththat or whatever the frick, I have enough experience with this to know it's pointless.
>You are clinging to one study that you insist has been debunked and ignoring everything else.
I made an argument and am focusing on the argument that I made, anon. Cook et al has been cited endlessly (despite being silly, as explained) and has been used as justification for quite a fair amount of policy decision and fund allocation. It seems reasonable to me to hammer this point. Is there something else you would like me to address now that we've established that Cook et al is silly?
>I'm not gonna follow you down the rabbit hole, I know you will post links from wattsupwiththat or whatever the frick
You can literally just read the papers, you know that right?
https://pastebin.com/E59Pnfss
You don't need to use crank sites at least, I don't :^) to support a position, you can just link directly to the papers.
>post academic papers
>conversation immediately stops
Many such cases!
>bruh New York City looked like fricking Blade Runner 2049 and just had the worst air quality in the world by a huge margin, what are you talking about? That is our future.
you're comparing a fricked up megacity to the world at large. The world is getting greener due to increased plant growth. Go touch grass. It's green out there.
>The average global temperature is rising, wildfires are increasing, heatwaves are increasing, the arctic is melting, ocean levels are rising, crop cycles are being disrupted, oxygen levels in the ocean are decreasing, fish are dying, etc etc. It is fricking up our way of life.
Wildfires are happening way less than in the early 1900's; average temperatures are increasing but far below what they used to be in prehistoric times so I wouldn't call it a world ending issue; the arctic is still in a much better shape than catastrophy masturbators would like to admit but as temperatures rise it will eventually melt; the other issues are worth addressing to but again not as catastrophic as certain groups would like you to think. An important thing to note is that right now it is believed that CO2 has a logarithmic effect on warming and that no matter what we do we're still going to experience warming in the coming decades and centuries. It's important we don't do anything rash that would compromise our way of life in the short term and that we solve these issues we face in a rational way while maintaining and improving quality of life. I believe that right now we're doing just that, therefore I don't think there is an apocalyptic problem in our hands.
>People who care about climate have "vested interests" yet somehow oil companies with billions of dollars in profit at stake don't
Both have vested interests, it's that simple. Funnily enough though, oil companies also have their fingers in the climate change pie. They'll end up profiting no matter what policies end up being pushed. Those old coots are unbeatable in this game.
>mid-00s climate denial oil lobbyist bullshit
Analogy:
We asked a group of 235 Catholic priests whether Jesus Christ literally rose from the dead. 228 said yes, therefore 97% of all religious figures across all religions believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead.
This is the common sense refutation of Cook et al without going in to the actual formal deboooonking. You are asking people who would not be in X field without tacitly accepting a premise whether or not they agree with that specific premise, and then applying their in-field bias to people outside of that field. It's intrinsically silly and you are silly for not thinking that this is silly.
>people who have done decades of work studying and researching the issue are biased because... they just are, okay?
So tiresome.
This is a very dishonest post, anon. I laid out the argument very simply for you.
>You are asking people who would not be in X field without tacitly accepting a premise whether or not they agree with that specific premise, and then applying their in-field bias to people outside of that field.
You cannot challenge this argument by saying these people have invested a massive amount of time into supporting this premise because belief in the premise is a _pre-requisite_ for many to be in the field at all- if you didn't accept the premise, why the frick would you be in the field?
Do you really not see any problems here at all? Are you this silly?
It's not an argument, it's an assertion with no basis. Very different things. There is no evidence to what you're saying whatsoever.
Meanwhile there is endless evidence that fossil fuel companies are doing everything they can to promote climate denial and delay action on climate change because doing so would destroy their profits.
Casual Google search:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/03/25/oil-and-gas-giants-spend-millions-lobbying-to-block-climate-change-policies-infographic/?sh=1f8a31af7c4f
>Every year, the world's five largest publicly owned oil and gas companies spend approximately $200 million on lobbying designed to control, delay or block binding climate-motivated policy.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/may/04/climate-sceptic-thinktank-received-funding-from-fossil-fuel-interests
>An influential thinktank that has led the backlash against the government’s net zero policy has received funding from groups with oil and gas interests, according to tax documents seen by the Guardian and OpenDemocracy.
And that took five seconds. If you don't like the sources by all means do your own research on fossil fuel company lobbying and climate denial funding. It goes on forever. All the major climate denial groups are funded by fossil fuel money. All of the money is in denial and obfuscation, hence why very little action has been taken on climate by most governments. If it was the climate movement that had all the money and power then Joe Biden wouldn't have just approved a debt ceiling deal that includes a new gas pipeline (let's not even talk about all the drilling permits he's approved).
The idea that it's the climate scientists that are biased is ridiculous on its face. It is projection, a "no u".
>It's not an argument, it's an assertion with no basis.
There is no basis to assert that spending massive amounts of time and money to pursue research into anthropocentric climate change necessitates a belief that anthropocentric climate change is real? Are you sure about that?
By the way, I'm not responding to your other comments because I would like to reach a conclusion on this primary point first before we move into the weeds.
For your peace of mind, I will say that I don't disagree on the influence of fossil fuel lobbying- I just think that this specific instance is one of profoundly sloppy "science" and would like to focus on that. I suspect we agree on more than we disagree on, I just think that you are taking things for granted that are not granted.
>consensus
matters little. The consensus used to be 99.99% that the Earth was the center of the universe until Galileo alone disputed and eventually disproved that theory, but not before being ridiculed, discredited and imprisoned. More on climate change specifically, what do you mean when you say that there is a 99-100% consensus on it? I'm not saying climate change isn't real, all I'm saying is that it really isn't a pressing issue. Most scientists don't think there is a world ending climate change threat looming over the world although certain groups with vested interests constantly try to paint such a picture. There is a lot of money to be made in this whole matter, and many prominent speakers like Al Gore have made handsome profits off of climate change.
>Again you are appealing to a reddit libertarian understanding of science where science is just an empty void with enlightenened independent "free-thinkers" (what you call "the Greats") floating around using their big brains to science it up. That's not how it works.
I have no idea what you're trying to say here aside from invoking Reddit. Do you not agree that great thinkers like Nikola Tesla, Galileo Galilei and Benjamin Franklin have raised the stock of life with their hard work and research? If you do, we are in agreement.
Funny how you're only thinking in the context of a rich first world country where point one percent of the population lives.
In the context of the developing world then: More basic infrastructure is necessary. It's about that simple. There's like a billion people with no access to electricity. Basic amenities that we in the developed world take for granted should already be available to the developing world. It's a tragedy that they are not, but they will eventually get these things.
This is not true. Our world exists because npcs keep it running. They stock grocery stores, they drive trucks, they build machines and software and entertainment. They create content you consume for enjoyment and provide opportunities to work til you die in exchange for money.
Free thinkers are a meme.
>This world is carried on the backs of the drooling masses with israelites leading the way
ftfy
play a game where everything works out perfectly and all strife and conflict have been eradicated and see how long it takes for you to start messing with things to keep yourself from getting bored
Dragons dogma. Become seneschal and realize you’re gonna godsbane in 30 seconds dooming the world to another cycle of the dragon
I would assume his new reality also has some kind of eustress as part of the "your perfect reality package"
>but what about the people who want to take on the world themselves?
yeah what about them, why should i fricking care.
>maruki rewrites reality to give me a harem of ungodly sexy furry waifus
>joker snaps it all away
MARUKI DID NOTHING WRONG
>Joker BTFOs furgays
Ok I changed my mind Maruki can eat a dick
>Phantom Thieves want to give people the power to decide their own lives
>Armstrong does, too
>One is bad, the other is good.
Explain this bullshit.
>Phantom Thieves want to give people the power to decide their own lives
Unless you've done something bad in their eyes, then it's bye bye free will
You can still commit crimes, they'll just make you feel the guilt of committing them
Armstrong would ensure laws actually served rape victims and brought rapists to justice, real justice. Sure, it wouldn't unrape the victim, but they won't experience the part where it feels like the whole world is against them.
That's why he's good while the phantom thieves are shit.
>Armstrong
>laws
You could not have missed the point harder. Armstrong would give the victim a knife and tell them to make their own destiny and then forget all about them
Kino
Sounds like the law working as intended, gay.
Would he?
Armstrong's whole schtick was placing the reins of society into the hands of the 'strong', through explicitly not those who source their 'strength' through external means (such as politicians and bureaucrats). His ideology is strange and nebulously defined, but I suspect that his desired end product would be highly darwinistic and decidedly light on governance and public welfare.
You wouldn't get it
>unrapes Shiho
>all the cum goes right back into Kamoshida's dick
>free will exists
Okay so where it does come from?
Consciousness comes from the brain. The brain is a physical thing governed by cause and effect. So where does this "free will" come into play?
And if you disagree that consciousness comes from the brain you'll have to explain how brain damage works, how moods work, how mental illness works, how dementia works, how development works, how sleep works, etc. All of it is explained by the brain.
Free will is a result of supernatural thinking, it is not based on evidence. Some people acknowledge this and insist that religion supersedes physical reality but most will try to dodge the issue and appeal to abstractions.
Does that mean that nothing matters and there's no responsibility for anything? Of course not, it just means that we have to acknowledge causality when figuring out how society should work. People are affected by outside factors and thus we should try to address those factors. It's not simply individuals operating purely independently.
>So where does this "free will" come into play?
The frontal lobe.
And what processes control how the frontal lobe operates?
This is what's called a "god of the gaps" argument. We don't have a perfect flawless all-reaching understanding of a physical process therefore it MUST be supernatural, even though we have no evidence for any supernatural phenomena whatsoever.
Please read and respond:
>And if you disagree that consciousness comes from the brain you'll have to explain how brain damage works, how moods work, how mental illness works, how dementia works, how development works, how sleep works, etc.
Start out by explaining how dementia works with a supernatural model of consciousness.
>This is what's called a "god of the gaps" argument.
This is what's called a "straw man" argument, because I never mentioned God or supernatural explanations whatsoever- I merely pointed out that purely biological processes within the brain do not currently adequately explain consciousness as we understand it. You made no effort to explore this idea or simply ask what I might be implying- you immediately went r/atheism.
You're a midwit, Harry.
I already described your kind perfectly:
>Some people acknowledge this and insist that religion supersedes physical reality but most will try to dodge the issue and appeal to abstractions.
You are saying it's not biological, but are not providing the only alternative explanation, which would be supernatural, because it's indefensible, so you obfuscate.
It's not a strawman, I am just cutting through your bullshit.
>You are saying it's not biological,
Strawman #2
Further proof that you are a midwit
> If the cause-effect principle that applies to the rest of reality
lol
lmao
>he still won't commit to a real position
I'm seeing a pattern here.
Irrelevant. If the cause-effect principle that applies to the rest of reality also applies to consciousness, free will will find no refuge there.
The only things that escape this are not grounded in the physical world: transcendental idealism being an obvious example from an individual capable of actual logical thought.
>Consciousness comes from the brain.
we do not currently have a functional model of consciousness that purely results from biological mechanisms in the brain
your response to seeing this information will likely be to say "of course we do!" without actually looking it up, but I implore you to take the five minutes to do some google searches before typing out a response I won't read
comes from the brain
(X) doubt.
He didn't even unrape them though, he deluded everyone into thinking they had been unraped
So?
Her hymen is still broken beyond all the reality warping and you're still a cuck fricking used goods lmao
I don't care.
Is there a difference between erasing psychological scars so they were never there and never having those scars in the first place?
Yes.
What's the difference if the person's cognition is the same?
Consequences of rape don't exist in this maruki world either
Then she can be raped as a virgin again
he quite literally brought the dead back to life
once his persona awakened he mementos was fusing with the real world, he could quite literally overwrite reality completely
so yeah, shiho would be unraped, hymen intact, not suicidal
All Maruki had to do was give everyone a choice. There'd be literally zero complaints if he just sent all the sufferinggays to Africa and then made the rest of the world a paradise for those who wanted it.
>his girlfriend doesn't even know who he is in the 'perfect' world
Lol, what a cuck.
Is that not a good indication for such an empowered individual?
He places the attainment of other people's desired reality above his own.
I'm sure he could have easily just twisted all of reality into a self-indulgent fantasy tailored to serve his every whim, but he chose to try and pursue a more selfless route.
If that was the actual reason for his actions, then he would be an ideal, benevolent ruler. However, the only reason he kept her memory distorted is because Maruki desires, above all else, to avoid pain. He would love for Ruri to return to him, but that means she must remember why she forgot everything, and rather than helping her cope with the pain and try to overcome it, he prefers to let his patients completely ignore it.
>Is that not a good indication for such an empowered individual?
>He places the attainment of other people's desired reality above his own.
Literally the definition of a cuck, Anon.
Cucks are the polar opposite of "empowered individual", they're DEpowered individuals.
No wonder he lost to some kids with costumes playing Super Heroes, kek.
No one man should hold that much power
Maruki is objectively better ruler than YHVH. Why shouldn't he?
Power corrupts, it's a definite fact.
Sure, but someone HAS to be in charge, and It's not going to be Shido #2.
Not someone. A group of people elected democratically that will be changed periodically. It's the best form of governance.
I elect Maruki so I win.
Maruki and? It can't just be one person. Also your vote only counts as one.
nta, but put me down for ten votes for Maruki!
Again, you are only one person. If you want to elect your favorite candidate organize a good campaign plan for them. You also still need to choose who else will govern aside from Maruki. Electing him still requires him to work within a group and decide by voting.
>muh democracy
The Phantom Thieves have the power to stop him, so they get to decide if they want to do so or not.
The rest can only whine.
Persona 5.5 - Phantom Thieves & the stolen democracy
Stop circulating extremist conspiracy theories.
The Phantom Theives don't steal the autonomy of others, they 'reinforce' it.
these conversations always seemed masturbatory to me
what is the point of asking this? what do you gain?
>no see free will isn't real
ok can you accurately predict everything then?
>well no...
will you ever be able to?
>um... probably not...
would anything be better if you could?
>....I guess not
so what's the goddamn point of huffing your own farts over this
philosophy kind of is just mental masturbation. Thinking for the sake of thinking is sometimes fun to do
From a practical perspective, moral responsibility is grounded in the idea that people are capable of "choice", or that they are "in control" of their actions. The idea that they aren't has very difficulty to deal with implications for ethical philosophy and has been present since the greeks. It also forces us to define what freedom really is and has far reaching implications for what justice mans in a criminal sense.
Besides, something being true or not is more important than its practical ramifications. Its true, it doesn't matter in an individuals day to day, because if they have free-will they always had it, and if they don't they never had it, but philosophy is asking questions to ask questions.
>something being true or not is more important than its practical ramifications
Why?
Because something can be interesting and completely irrelevant, and the way in which a given conclusion can effect the way in which we think about everything else (and the logical connections between things) is fun while also having frickall practical application.
I could give you some Eudemonia bullshit, but I won't.
by accepting that free will isn't real, we can stop blaming the individual and instead pick apart more relentlessly the conditions that created the individual and in a sense, destroy those conditions.Any given person that you may hate, is that way because of the multitude of factors that contributed to their personality. They did not "decide" to be a piece of shit, they were made to decide that by our very biology. Denial of the truth just means less people are willing to understand how the truth works.
As a devout follower of Giambattista Vico I believe that the search for scientific truth is a crime against God and that all human intellectual effort should be spent towards studies of sociology, history, and religion
good day, sir
Science is a pursuit of truth, but let's be real here. Most facts that we took for granted are bullshit.
How is it any different than how Maruki's world works? Except they use money to buy their way to push their realities to the ignorant masses.
Free will is real enough. Unless you have a universe sized computer to predict the future, then there are so many variables involved that it's infeasible. Not even getting into quantum mechanics here - that alone ensures that free will exists. That's good enough.
To some higher being outside of our reality, supposing they even exist, free will may not exist - but for us the very question is irrelevant since we will never be able to accurately understand and predict every variable of the system by nature of being inside it.
that doesn't ensure that free will exists at all. stating that there are so many variables that we will never predict the future does not mean that we can not simplify the question and predict this new answer with a tangibly useful degree of accuracy. Free will is a meaningless phrase that people cling to because they believe that without free will they aren't making decisions. we are a decision making machine, that machine just takes the data at hand and makes a decision with it, even if it's bad data. by accepting this we can make ourselves better
as humans, it would be a waste to not temper our base instincts with reason. accept those instincts and wild emotions as a part of ourselves, but control them. Avoiding that is simply being afraid of the self.
Depends by what you mean by free will. If lets say some homeless is starving to death and finds some food they will either:
1. Steal the food because they dont want to die.
2. Don't steal because it is "immoral" to do so, trys to find other ways to survive.
Of course you can argue that in both cases they are affected by their environment and conditions that they ultimately have no free will, but that's beside the fricking point. You are in control in what actions you can do. Arguing that the choices and controls you can do in games is an illusion because "they are programmed to do so!" is moronic
they will make the decision that all of their life experiences up until that moment including from their childhood to even their last drug trip, shaped the bio-chemical landscape of their brain, has been leading up to. the brain will spit out a decision however quickly or slowly and that decision can change on the fly since the brain is always receiving new information. it seems like "free" will because my brain will generalize the homeless people i've seen and make an assumption on what they will do, but their decision will invariably be locked to their life experiences. this can even mean they'll make a different decision from what they may have done in a previous attempt but it's different now since it's happened to them before.
in other words you frick, it's NOT besides the point, all of this was built up to, if you rewound time and played it over and over again do you really believe that the outcome could ever be different if no one knew that was happening? by accepting this you can stop trying to solve problems by only looking at the end result.
>free will doesn't exist and everyone's choices are a result of upbringing and environment
So how did Francis Ngannou manage to become UFC Heavyweight Champion of the world when he was born in Cameroon and his friends and family all told him he was crazy for trying to go to Europe to change his life?
because being born in a bad situation doesn't mean you wont rise against those situations, but it's determined by your biology, your upbringing, your surroundings, your diet etc etc etc. the conditions for a winner, for someone that thrives can be found in the most wretched places. someone surrounded by crime and misery may have had just the right influences that sparked their human instincts to fight against it.
in other words, sometimes the cream really does rise to the top.
So I ask again, how did Francis Ngannou specifically "environment" his way into becoming the UFC Heavyweight Champion? What separates him from the hundreds of thousands of other Cameroonians that did not accomplish what he did?
it's not JUST environment as I said, but how the frick am I supposed to know his exact life experiences? perhaps it was his genetics, perhaps a relative said something one day that stuck with him and inspired him. or perhaps he had just enough bad days that he came to hate the life he came from enough. maybe he even walked down a street and saw someone else that inspired him and that stuck with him. we are problem solving machines that take the experiences fed into us along with our genetics and spit out decisions. that doesn't detract from those decisions, but calling it "free will" is childish and denies the reality of how our mind reaches decisions.
>how the frick am I supposed to know his exact life experiences
How are you supposed to pass judgement on anyone without knowing their life experiences? Why should anyone believe in the absence of free will when you can't even prove your claim?
>Why should anyone believe in the absence of free will when you can't even prove your claim?
every bit of evidence about how people think and act shows that their behavior stems from events in their childhood, and people who don't fit those patterns are often shown to have had events that lead them onto alternate paths. at this point it should be clear that people believing in free will should have to show proof. but you've been obsessed with covering your ears so you can feel special, that human determination comes from some place unreachable by trauma and societal influence.
how indeed are we supposed to pass judgement when we dont know their life experiences? why should prison be suffering for the man that was led by the ear to this wrong path.
We get it. You love Black folk and wish to absolve them of all personal agency.
no, I want peoples brains forcibly corrected but there's no actual point getting into that since the problem then is "who do you trust to do the correcting if we even could"
>at this point it should be clear that people believing in free will should have to show proof.
I chose to post this. Checkmate.
For your consideration, people are also happier believing they have free will. So even if you don't believe in it (which you can't prove either), it's better for society if people believe in it.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5209362/
you posted it because you grew up in an environment that molded your personality in such a way it makes you want to have pointless online arguments with strangers
Nah.
while I will actually give this a genuine read, 1600 people seems like a pathetic sample size in such a large population. I also would have preferred a study outside of china but this one claims it has similar ones.
you can also have people saying they are happy believing something, but I do not believe that people always know what is good for them, especially in masses.
I was lazy finding other examples for a Ganker thread, but it's been shown in other studies too for a while now. I remember hearing about it when I was doing my psychology minor.
*minor back in 2010 or so
then you should be able to understand why I can't just take you at your word when there's been studies claiming that we become conscious of decisions after the brain has acted.
I mean it's unrelated. Both can be true. I don't expect you to take me at my word, just wanted to share it.
but how can both be true? if the conscious mind is not actually at the wheel making the decisions then how can we make the jump to free will in the first place. unless you are just talking about people being happier believing in free will regardless of truth.
>but how can both be true?
Because free will doesn't need to be real even for the belief to make them happy
>unless you are just talking about people being happier believing in free will regardless of truth.
Exactly
>every bit of evidence about how people think and act shows that their behavior stems from events in their childhood, and people who don't fit those patterns are often shown to have had events that lead them onto alternate paths
So based on that you should be able to correct identify, without fail, what specifically caused a person to make a specific decision. So now it's incumbent upon you to prove this theory true by demonstrating it.
>So based on that you should be able to correct identify, without fail, what specifically caused a person to make a specific decision
obviously not and thats a fricking absurd statement that goes against what I've been saying throughout the thread. we do not have the power to do that because we have denied reality and not applied ourselves to the truth.
>obviously not
again, since you're unable to you can't expect anyone to take you seriously
Except I'm not asking that at all, I'm asking for someone to use their supposed knowledge to support their claims. Why should anyone be convinced of their theory if their knowledge is lacking?
you are once again, being an absurd moron that has ignored the entire point made in favor of your "lack of thought" experiment. every breath you take is a mockery of your own braincells.
>you are once again, being an absurd moron
I'm not the guy claiming free will doesn't exist but refuses to prove an example of it
I've made things very clear throughout the thread. desperately clinging to something that makes you feel special does not actually make you special. please swallow your own teeth.
>desperately clinging to something that makes you feel special
how ironic
no one arguing for free will thinks it's special, it just is
on the other hand we have some guy taking a contrarian stance and refusing to prove it in any practical way so you tell me who's coming off like a special snowflake here
>If you can't form an omniscient model of how this arrow will fly down to the atom, then that proves wind isn't will and I make the arrow go where I want by thinking really hard
>i can willfully raise my arm, move in any direction whenever i want it to
>there is no explanation for this other than conciousness, which even science has cant explain the hard problem.
>urhm ackshually no, everything you do and will do is a chain of reactions that started all the way since the big bang.
???
Are you assuming that consciousness exists outside of time and causality?
>time and causality
They are both constructs of the human mind
Giga-transcendentalist I kneel.
Arguments about free will are irrelevant to Persona's universe where phenomenon clearly exists, along with all kinds of crazier stuff.
>cant explain the hard problem.
Yeah. The thing that gets me is some people don't even recognize what you're talking about. They'll just talk about stuff like "consciousness stops when the brain stops working and these neurons activate when you're thinking of this, so we know everything about it." You still have to explain the nature of subjective conscious experience. It's like they genuinely don't understand what's being talked about, when you'd expect every living person to intuitively know.
We're not the ones who brought the existence/nonexistence of free will into the discussion, and we're not doing it to free ourselves of responsibility of our actions. We just want an actual argument from Jokergays that's substantive rather than just going "MUH FREE WILL" when free will is an incredibly nebulous concept.
autonomy is a human need and right and maruki infringes upon the autonomy of everyone so egregiously that he cannot be allowed to continue
what's truly incredible to me is that the Japanese of all people were philosophically mature enough to understand this while many here are not
I'm not really one to call others bootlickers but holy shit guys
>Put a ball on a flat surface
>The ball can literally move anywhere
>A hand push it into a direction
>The dumb ball thinks it has free will because it could had move any direction
Frick, I never realize there's so many dumb NPCs here.
Benevolent Dictator > Democracy.
I will never understand Marukigays. He is objectively the same as Yald.
Maruki wasn't solving shit. All he did was provide wish-fulfillment without actually addressing nor fixing anyone's problems. Real problems that require confronting problems head-on and providing a solution that will help in the future.
But my problems (no furry wives) could all directly be solved with wish fulfillment
I don't care. I believe in le unrape man.
>You definitely have free will!!
>The world changing event is decided by a few teenagers and a fricking cat.
What Maruki sought to do was fundamentally identical to Yaldabaoth. If you oppose one, you must oppose the other, otherwise you're a hypocrite. If it's really important to you that Maruki's ideals should be realized, then you should have submitted to Yaldabaoth before Maruki even came into the picture.
Yaldaboeth wasn't promising me furry wives
You would be just as happy as if you had furry wives.
I would be significantly happier, I crave intimacy
I don't want Shido #2 to be put in charge. Maruki will do.
It's the easiest and the most straightforward solution. What's the issue here?
I think that I would be more sympathetic to the climate change clergy if they didn't go out of their way to look like they are lying / scamming as much as possible.
I concede that they might be correct, but the constant barrage of scam-like and dishonest-seeming behavior is a bit too much for my reptile brain to dismiss.
>I think that I would be more sympathetic to the climate change clergy if they didn't go out of their way to look like they are lying / scamming as much as possible.
>I concede that they might be correct, but the constant barrage of scam-like and dishonest-seeming behavior is a bit too much for my reptile brain to dismiss.
Saving the planet is just the cover of getting off oil as much as possible so we can finally nuke saudi arabia as they deserve.
>getting off oil
The fact that there is no serious effort to divorce the vertical integration of oil & coal from "green" tech tells me that there is, at the highest levels at least, a serious disbelief in the legitimacy of the anti-fossil fuel / anthropocentric climate change claims.
>The fact that there is no serious effort to divorce the vertical integration of oil & coal from "green" tech tells me that there is, at the highest levels at least, a serious disbelief in the legitimacy of the anti-fossil fuel / anthropocentric climate change claims.
The fact that we didn't switch to nuclear power far more than we have pretty much refutes it, I just hate saudi arabia and would love to see their stupid black box burn in hellfire.
>The fact that we didn't switch to nuclear power far more than we have pretty much refutes it
yeah can't argue with that
there are a few developing nations that were on-track to pursue nuclear and then got derailed by I suspect the US in favor of continuing to use coal
believing that all human behavior at all levels is centered exclusively around short-term economic benefit with zero long-horizon preference is so pessimistic that I reject it out of hand
might be wrong, but I think I'd be a worse person if I believed otherwise
>there are a few developing nations that were on-track to pursue nuclear and then got derailed by I suspect the US in favor of continuing to use coal
there are many developing nations that still pursue nuclear. Coal is just abundant and cheap. Best of both worlds.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Vietnam
the startup cost of nuclear is pretty high and for many countries would necessitate funding from outside sources like China, which for many nations is a total no-go
I'm more thinking about positions of influence where the entire point of the position is to have long-horizon preference
I have yet to see serious thought being applied to how to remove systemic dependency on fossil fuels
>Corporations are essentially life forms that evolve to maximize profit, individual components of the system (executives) that do not work towards this end will get culled due to the nature of the system.
I too have extensively read Kaczynski
>the startup cost of nuclear is pretty high and for many countries would necessitate funding from outside sources like China, which for many nations is a total no-go
Yep. It is my hope that the SMR technology becomes profitable, that would reduce the upfront capital costs and make it easy to power small isolated areas like individual towns. On another note I find it astonishing that many in the developed world seem to abhor the use of coal, natural gas or oil in the developing world when these usually just happen to be the cheapest, most reliable and most abundant choices to power their fledgling grids. In truth the world needs all forms of energy for the foreseeable future. The concept of an energy transition is flawed, it's more of an increase in energy options. Global coal demand reached a new high in -- get this -- 2022!
>believing that all human behavior at all levels is centered exclusively around short-term economic benefit with zero long-horizon preference is so pessimistic that I reject it out of hand
It's not about pessimism, that's just how capitalism as a system was (self) designed. I say this without any sort of positive or negative value judgement towards it, it's simply the way the machine works. This explanation still makes sense even if you completely disregard any influence of individual human greed. Corporations are essentially life forms that evolve to maximize profit, individual components of the system (executives) that do not work towards this end will get culled due to the nature of the system.
Saudis are based, rule their country the way they think is best without asking anyone's opinion, and western imperialists still have to crawl before them lest they raise the price of the funny black liquid
>supports gays and trannies
lmao they are just as subverted as everyone else
Why would you think that when even at the highest levels, profit is the most significant motivator of action?
whats the difference between a world thats fake and a world thats real
>literally rewrites reality
sure, if it was just normal brainwashing you could make an argument
I mean, PT did the exact same thing as Maruki did by rewriting Kamoshida's cognition. PT have no moral high ground in the first place.
Kamoshida is a rapist and abuser. Take the L you moron.
If Maruki's method of brainwashing people is the issue here. What makes PT any better?
They just are.
The issue is that he brainwashes innocent people as well. And before you screech, having a palace or appearing in mementos is a sign that your mind is objectionally evil.
and they are extremely conflicted about rewriting memories of even bad people, so it would still make sense.
they didn't go with that though lol
PT aren't rewriting people.
They only beat the demons who possesed their shadows and suppressed their conscience. That's what causes sudden whiplash of guilt.
You can't manipulate people by metaverse. You only remove paranormal sources of their extended behavior.
That's why Goro was just murdering inconvenient people.
Not if I have anything to say about it and I do, i'm gonna fix the timeline
The real redpill for Persona 5 is realizing that your character is the only person who matters in the team.
A talking cat has no opinions that matter, a raped woman has no opinions that matter, a homosexual has no opinions that matter.
Flip them all off and go frick your teacher.
While I think it's necessary to treat P5 as its own thing separate from the rest of the series, given what we know of the Collective Unconscious and especially precedents set by previous games (particularly P3), it's hard to say what Maruki's doing is necessarily a good thing.
Yeah, if MUH FREE WILL is all you morons care about, then Adachi is objectively a hero in P4.
>murders a woman
didn't offer her much of a choice huh
Adachi didn't killed her. The TV did.
>I didn't shoot the victim, Your Honor! The gun did!
Neither the gun nor the bullet killed them either, the gunshot wound and subsequent blood loss did. I'm at least 3 degrees removed and totally innocent.
Adachi merely put the women in a place where people's collective consciousness act on their free will.
Are you going to persecute 7 billion people as well?
>throw a person into a room and seal the door
>I didn't kill her, the room did!
Well, if the room is supposed to be real friendly, it's not his fault.
would have been creepier if maruki literally just brainwashed them into being happy and you saw shit like futaba and soichiro talking to empty air as if wakaba was there.
>no, you HAVE to suffer, you HAVE to do things the hard way
>what the frick do you mean you want things to easy? are you demented?
You can't prove free will either way, but if you hand reality over to some guy you're not giving free will a chance and should therefore be violently murdered before you try and ruin the universe again later
You vill have no food and you vill be happy.
Reminder that all video game and anime girls want to be with East Asian Men only.
Wrong
Impossible. Chie wants to be with me, and I'm not an East Asian Man. QED.
i have the feeling it's supposed to be possible to max out s.links and skills on NG but. clearly im fricking up somewhere
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/ps4/260936-persona-5-royal/faqs/78212/ace-april
you get more than enough time to max out all social links and see all hangout events ect
and you still have boatloads of free time (near the end) for darts and the jazz club
ehh i'll leave the hyperoptimizing on NG+, thx though
the one i linked you don't even need to reload for stats or whatever, it's not hyper optimized at all, but it does let you see everything
just remember, the MOST IMPORTANT thing to do is clear palaces in 1 go, so you have more time to do other things
>the MOST IMPORTANT thing to do is clear palaces in 1 go
that much i've picked up from finishing base P5... kamoshida on merciless was a bit of a fricking Black person though
bad thing feel bad
good thing feel good
golden man makes all thing good thing
golden man good
Ahh Maruki threads. I cant think of many other characters who guarantee a bump limit
Hes probably the best thing to come out of the whirlpool of dogshit that is Persona
>world is perfect
>everyone gets exactly what they want
>world instantly stagnates and all innovation disappears
>humans become increasingly hedonistic as nothing matters and they are no longer forced to compete
>world instantly stagnates and all innovation disappears
and what exactly is wrong with that?
aren't things good enough already? what the frick more do you need
>wow we need to heckin live on mars
no you fricking don't
you only want to do that because the earth is a shithole, which it would not be if maruki was allowed to impose his perfect reality
>world stagnates
nope. people would just work on what they wanted to without having to deal with being raped, getting cancer, or starving to death
>all innovation disappears
unlikely, mankind's imagination would still exist and everything would be feasible and in reach
>humans become increasingly hedonistic as nothing matters
how does cancer, starvation, and endless suffering make things matter?
>a persons dream and happiness is to invent new things
>in maruki's reality, they end up creating wonder tech that would never have been possible otherwise
ok moron
The concept of stagnation would disappear from Maruki's reality by the time he claims full power and assumes Yaldabaoth's role as Mankind's Savior because he'd be able to passively and seamlessly manipulate to such a perfect degree on a global level that he's able to ensure everyone is happy and content with living at all times while micromanaging all details to ensure there are no conflicts of interest that require someone else to suffer for someone's happiness.
As far as the game shows us, there are literally no negatives to Maruki reaching his full potential.
>there are literally no negatives to Maruki reaching his full potential.
MUH CHOICE
MUH FREE WILL
YOU'RE ROBBING PEOPLE OF CHARACTER GROWTH IT'S EVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL
NO
WOMEN MUST BE RAPED
>muh choice
You'll still have choice, but it'll be choices that can no longer cause suffering for anybody and ultimately build towards a greater happiness for yourself and the world.
>free will
Maruki will simply redefine the concept of free will in order to make it better suit his reality, and you'll be perfectly content with this definition when his rewrites reach all of humanity, as in Maruki's reality, it's the only definition you'll have ever known.
>muh character growth
Maruki will be more than happy to provide a safe journey of the self that does not require suffering and allows you to come out of it feeling better about yourself as a person, as long as it makes you a happier person in his reality.
>Maruki will simply redefine the concept of free will in order to make it better suit his reality, and you'll be perfectly content with this definition when his rewrites reach all of humanity, as in Maruki's reality, it's the only definition you'll have ever known.
George Orwell couldn't have worded it better himself.
why are there post-atheist homosexuals itt defending Madara's Infinite Tsukiyomi unironically
I've never even played Persona game
i hate being alive and i never gave my consent to be spawned into this hellscape
born to shit, forced to wipe
i hate it so much
if maruki told me he could finally make me happy and give me everything i ever wanted, i'd agree with him in nanoseconds
>muh consent
homie
your sperm cell was one of 200 million in your mom's snatch
You were the one who fought the hardest, swam the fastest, and the ONLY one to cross the finish line, when even ANY of them reaching an egg is a long shot
And if you consider your parents, grandparents, ancestry: that coincidence repeats a million times over and your very existence in particular becomes exponentially unlikely
Stop crying
>You were the one who fought the hardest, swam the fastest, and the ONLY one to cross the finish line, when even ANY of them reaching an egg is a long shot
that wasn't me that was a clump of genetic data doing some bullshit i never asked it to
who was it then lil' homie, an alien?
Because a lot of people would consent to Infinite Tsukiyomi if you asked them.
Probably the majority.
I would, dreams are cooler than real life, you can't learn fire spells or fly or have a loyal furry wife irl
I've had three separate dreams just from my evening nap today. I'm straight edge and not even into any of that lucid dreaming crap.
Just go to sleep homie
I dont remember my dreams unless something extreme happens that forces me awake, it fricking sucks
>Boy I sure do like this girl and want to date her but she and all her family and friends hate me! If only there was a way to brainwash them all so they could accept me even though I treat her terribly!
>Maruki: Say no more senpai!
>what maruki would actually do
>stop the boy from being c**t to her
>since the boy is no longer a dick there are now 2 options
>maruki would see if the girl would be happy with the boy too
>if yes, he would make them get together
>if not, he would make it so the boy wanted nothing to do with her
Except that literally didn't happen in-game. The characters outright talk about a girl being with a guy that she didn't like and how bizarre it was that they were such a bad match together but it's what the guy wanted so the girl just got mindraped into wanting it despite the guy abusing her and bystanders outside the relationship commenting on it.
where the frick does this happen, some random npc conversation that only happens on x date in y city?
Yes the whole point of Maruki's route is to walk around town and see for yourself how the world really is and decide for yourself if its the right choice which is the entire point of Maruki giving you the choice to give in on your own accord before he reaches his deadline and chooses to force you to accept his reality. Instead of brainwashing Joker like he did everyone else he gave them the choice and you the player were supposed to see that things were fricked up and Maruki wasn't as perfect as he claimed to be.
yeah he admitted it wasn't perfect - yet
but achieving salvation for like 90% of the planet is a damn sight better than 0%
given enough time he could eventually make everyone truly happy in the best way possible
>given enough time he could eventually make everyone truly happy in the best way possible
It's still wrong. He was literally brainwashing people and someone had to take a stand against that. People always go "b-but the Phantom Thieves brainwash people too!!!" and even if that's true they're the only ones who could stop Maruki especially since they already agreed to disband afterwards meaning they wouldn't be doing their own so-called brainwashing. Also Lavinia reaches out to you asking you to stop him which implies that on some spiritual or metaphysical sense what Maruki was doing was a threat to humanity enough for them to step in.
And that's exactly how the real world works. What's the problem?
Wasn't the point of that overly longwinded multiple choice part that everyone skips, that its not actually a perfect world and Maruki thinks its better for the average person to give up and not try if it would mean getting hurt in the process?
maruki believes the MOST IMPORTANT thing is making sure that "yourself" doesn't get harmed
>my girlfriend almost died, had a psychotic meltdown and then completely forgot about me
>but because of this, i gained the power to make other people happy
>so the total amount of happiness in the world increased, so that's ok with me
is maruki a cuck
Yes, he would be okay with someone stealing his bicycle
The P5 cast is the most cucked in the history of vidya. They would rather be stuck as a cat forever or be literally dead than live in a world that's too "perfect".
>why is a cast of rebels rebelling against something forced upon them
>we are going to rebel against society because of its unfairness and cruelty!
>okay, im going to create a reality where there is no unfairness or cruelty
>W-WE REBEL AGAINST YOUR IMPOSING RULE!
Japan outlawing rape and arranged marriages, is the main reason it's a dying nation
you gays always talk about free will but what about being will free
interesting thread and all but a lot more people would benefit form Maruki's world, even if they were there temporarily, than if Maruki was never allowed to do anything.
Hell Maruki's world influenced Ryuji and Ann to change their lives for the better, Ryuji knowing what it felt like to be able to run again kept him from rebelling against society but putting his dreams away.
Okay but for real
>um sweaty? Did you do something i didnt like? I will now break into your mind and litterally rewrite yourself, so that you feel the way i want you to feel?
>who decides that? US
>UHMMMMMMM Did you just UNRAPE a girl?? Did you just grant peoples wishes???? WE need freewill. You CAN'T just mind control people.
okay, can anyone explain this shit?? Literally insanity. They straight up SEARCH for people to punish. If they had more power they would influence reality even more. Explain this.
>um sweaty? Did you do something i didnt like? I will now break into your mind and litterally rewrite yourself, so that you feel the way i want you to feel?
>>who decides that? US
That's not how stealing a heart works in the story, moron.
All that matters was his boss music was bumpin
I BELIEVE
The best flight of stairs ever
Maruki just wanted everyone to be happy, even (you) anon. Who wouldn't want that?
I don't want to be happy if it means the people I hate are too. I'm fine suffering it it means they do. I've given up on ever being happy anyway so I might as well drag everyone else down with me.
Is there any more powerful force in the universe than sheer spite?
People do the dumbest most life threatening shit just to prove others wrong
based as long as the people you hate are israelites, Black folk and trannoids, if so you're literally me
Among others, yes.
(me)
Maruki is a homosexual and only trannies who want to rewrite reality to be real women support him
>unraping all those girls
Thats the problem
Sure am glad I made it to this Persona 5 thread so we can talk about Persona 5 Tactica, the up-and-coming new Persona 5 spin-off game with a new take on gameplay for the franchise and ATLUS as a whole!
I sure am excited for it, and I sure am ready for thread upon thread discussing it for its trailers and eventual release later this year!
It looks sick, right guys?
G-guys?
SOMEONE out there cares, right?
I actually didn't care at all
The new shin megami tensei spinoff looked cool though
I'm not hyped for it but strategy is alright. Just gimme Devil Survivor 3.
> spend whole game fighting people corrupted by power
> cthulhu defined reality? sign me up
Perfect by whose measure?
What did she mean by this?
That's Makoto when she's not in your party, stalking you
She's just smiling anon
Yeah didnt like fighting against him because i felt that he wasn’t totally wrong.
I fought him anyway because I thought his costume was kinda dumb.
Maruki is absolutely right.
My only issue, is that for his world to be, it means handing omnipotence to one man, and even the best man among us has flaws.
There's no certainty that Maruki will be the same person with the same goals 100 years down the line.
World without rape is not worth living in marukiiiiiii!!!
>Have a discussion about free will with a friend of mine I consider to be very smart
>They start to deliberately misunderstand my points, jump to conclusions and ascribe incorrect assumptions, even though I know they're capable of at least understanding my position
It's rarely worth having the discussion, I find that for some people, the idea that free will doesn't exist is terrifying on an existential level and they won't so much as apply genuine thought to it.