Is pop philosophy going to be the next pop science?
Why not both
if theres one thing we really dont need in this world its more alain de bottons and stefan molyneuxs
ONE
>>1113804
pls no
Has anybody here read UBP?
Is it good for a laugh?
>>1113895
Isn't it UPB - Universally Preferred Behavior?
I've read summaries of it, and it seems like the kind of system that only takes one enterprising individual to break it completely apart.
>>1113895
It's literally just deontology with a new name.
"I might have been arguing in my spare time..."
>>1113979
>So another thing stefan has stolen?
Pretty much, though, at this point there's very few philosophers who can say anything revolutionary about ethics at all tbqh.
>>1114001
But how many philosophers claim it is going to completely revolutionalise the field?
>>1113806
There is literally nothing wrong with Alain
>>1113949
is that john cleese?
>>1114885
yes and hes with Micheal palin
>>1113803
there's already pop atheism
if it combats scientism and maybe gets more people reading, fuck it I'm in. As long as they leave phenomenology alone i'm fine. After the new ontology is formed we wont need pop anything.
>>1117376
gross
Yes.
>>1117376
>if it combats scientism
>>1113803
Nobody cares about philosophy; save for philosophers. And philosophers are useless.
>>1117593
the girl or statement
>>1117615
wut
>>1117376
>As long as they leave phenomenology alone i'm fine.
I'm afraid you're already 40 years too late on that one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29pPZQ77cmI
>>1118009
Well it hasn't had too much of an impact on "vanilla" philosophy so I guess that's ok. Plus that snippet was great at simplifying a great concept.
