is philosophy pretentious /pol/?
has the concept been ruined by insincere people who wanted to sound smart?
>>70616672
Yes and yes.
All philosophy is is people trying to justify and rationalize doing whatever they feel like doing anyway. (Kant). Or establishment of systems based on isolated feelings to justify the same thing. (Utilitarianism).
Sometimes among the older philosophers you get some good stuff, like Aristotle and Descartes, but the above holds true.
There is a meme of Good and Evil, and this meme is pervasive and influential in almost all philosophy despite as any rational thinker should be able to realize, these are entirely made up concepts that don't actually exist in reality in any objective fashion.
>>70616867
i remember you i think, you explained the idea of atheist morals being a meme?
either that or norwegians really like this stuff
>whatever they feel like doing anyway
how about in the cases of rationalizing depression and existential angst, unless you'd say those also counts as something people feel like doing?
Before calling me a roach, let me say that i had philosophical conversations with many people around the world.
Believe me, %90 of people talking about philosophy don't know shit. They are just pretending to understand or understand a superficial side of it. Or worse, they are told what to think about a specific approach.
Philosophy is mostly esoteric in its pure form and links to other parts of your being. These pretentious faggots turned it into mental masturbation. Limited and shallow.
Existentialism is good.
Academic philosophy is just plain faggotry.
>>70616867
What about Nietzsche with his master slave morality?.
>>70617342
>mostly esoteric
>Academic philosophy is just plain faggotry.
i agree completely here, it is just that the faggotry has tainted most of it. in fact i don't think it should usually even be talked about, reading would be the only way to effectively communicate a lot of it for later thought.
Kinda.
Picture EXTREMELY related.
God is Dead.
>>70617584
10/10 chart actually topkek
>>70617069
>either that or norwegians really like this stuff
This must be it.
>atheist morals being a meme?
All morals are memes though. They're an abstraction or attempt to codify feelings we have which amount to little more than individual, social and group survival mechanisms.
People look within and think they can find "absolute moral wisdom". But it's bullshit. You're a product of evolution, you cannot find any absolute moral wisdom or truth within because such a thing 1) Does not exist, and 2) Cannot evolve.
People like to appeal to God because "aha, that must be the moral truth since this is the highest authority". But you should realize that all religion is also made up by people.
>how about in the cases of rationalizing depression and existential angst, unless you'd say those also counts as something people feel like doing?
Well, look at it this way:
If you succeed rationalizing and this gives you will to live, you're an evolutionary success no matter what reasoning you used.
Otherwise, you're potentially a failure because you, in worst case scenario, end up killing yourself.
>>70617705
Funny, indeed.
The truth is sad, tho.
>>70617342
>Existentialism is good.
lol
>>70617584
>No Eastern philosophy
Bitches don't even know about the Tao
To many people, a confusing aspect of Taoism is its very definition. Many religions will happily teach a Philosophy/Dogma which in reflection defines a person. Taoism flips this around. It starts by teaching a truth; “The Tao” is indefinable. It then follows up by teaching that each person can discover the Tao in their own terms. A teaching like this can be very hard to grasp when most people desire very concrete definitions in their own life.
A simply way to start learning the definition of Taoism is to start within yourself. Here are three easy starting steps to learning Taoism:
Don’t concentrate on the definition of the Tao (this will come later naturally)
Understand what Taoism really is. Taoism is more than just a “philosophy” or a “religion”. Taoism should be understood as being: A system of belief, attitudes and practices set towards the service and living to a person’s own nature.
The path of understanding Taoism is simply accepting yourself. Live life and discover who you are. Your nature is ever changing and is always the same. Don’t try to resolve the various contradictions in life, instead learn acceptance of your nature.
>>70617813
do you not realize that your entire argument is still just a meme?
>muh appeal to evolution fallacy
please be more scientific when making arbitrary statements about the nature of existence
Philosophy has lost its way. Most philosophers are either tenure-monkeys or trippy-hippy cult figures.
>>70617584
Whats wrong with Nietzsche and Schopenhauer? :(
>>70616672
>The concept
What in god's name are you talking about? What concept? How could anyone ruin thinking for anyone else by being a pompous ass?
>>70617584
The chronology in that image is super-bad, but I lol'd anyway.
>>70617948
Eastern philosophy is not "philosophy", it's just mysticism with a coat of "muh philosophy" mixed with religion.
>>70618042
Nietzsche was a moral utopist, Schopenhauer was a moral dystopist.
>>70617584
>No Dawkins
>>70618237
*Nietzsche had autism, Schopenhauer had autism
>>70618237
>it's just mysticism
You silly negro
>>70617966
If you think I mean that "what is natural or evolved is good" then read again, that's not what I mean. In fact, it's the opposite. I'm saying that no matter what "wisdom" we find within, it IS a product of evolution and therefore it is imperfect and not some god-like authority.
If you think I mean "what is natural is bad" then that's not what I meant either. The reason I mention evolution is because you have to understand morality in this context. It's a survival mechanism. It helps you, as an individual, or your offspring, or your tribe to survive.
That's what's important: You have a these feelings because they helped you survive, not because they were INHERENTLY moral.
Looking at morality in this context you'll find it makes sense. There is no truth or widom, only reactions and then the processing of those reactions. Like feeling disgust when someone murders someone else in cold blood. Because this feeling makes you a better individual suited to social life. See? It may be that that murder wasn't in cold blood or that it was necessary or whatever, but that doesn't really matter. That's for you to decide with your rational faculties. But to create vast systems trying to grant too much weight to your emotional responses and rationlize them is a mistake (see utilitarianism).
>>70618042
Schopenhauer pioneered the ARE YOU KIDDING ME! approach to philosophy. A lot of what he said was brilliant, and he found really clever formulations for many abstruse Kantian ideas, but he didn't have any idea what Kant and the post-Kantians were arguing about and it shows in his inability to argue for his positions, rather than posturing.
Nietzsche take the ARE YOU KIDDING ME! approach to extremes in some places. The guy who made this chart clearly appreciates deductive, logical arguments. Nietzsche only has a clear, sustained train of thought in "Truth and Lie" and in GM, and even there it's not exactly an argument you can map out logically. Really, in Gay Science or Beyond Good and Evil, it's like you're reading Nietzsche's blog. (And then Will to Power would be when you start wading through the comment section.)
>>70618523
>he didn't have any idea what Kant and the post-Kantians were arguing about and it shows in his inability to argue for his positions, rather than posturing.
>it's like you're reading Nietzsche's blog.
Welcome to Philosophy.
>>70616672
it isn't, but it has gotten worse over the centuries
it does not surprise me that the modern age does not appreciate philosophy, it frankly isnt quite smart enough for it and it does not have the patience
however, it is correct that western philosophy (which is what I assume OP talks about) has the tendency to be
-too abstract
-too wordy
-too high minded, meaning, big ideas big words but unable to provide anything of substance with immediate relevance to life here and now
there is valid criticism but the criticism applies only to philosophy as it was already declining and it declined the most after the industrialization, ie the age of (non) enlightenment.
if you read any philosophy prefer continental unless there is a good reason or a good exception. Analytic philosophy is to continental as protestants are to catholics.
the antagonism towards philosophy is in my opinion similar to the (predominantly leftist) antagonism towards intellectuals in modern day: we started to hate it when sharlatans found their way in and did it wrong. Academia was ruined once leftist ideologues went in and wrote huge piles of pseudo sophisticated theory soaked with their ideology. Same happened in philosophy, where obscurantists and pretentious wannabes wrote trash and people later began to think that's what philosophy is
>>70618502
>morality in this context. It's a survival mechanism. It helps you, as an individual, or your offspring, or your tribe to survive.
I argue that this is itself an unscientific arbitration, a behaviorist's post hoc and largely baseless explanation for morality
>>70616867
>meme of Good and Evil
Good and Evil is a concept that arises from the existence of Pleasure and Pain
Human culture is about humans becoming increasingly self-aware until they destroy themselves cause is the only moral thing to do
How to know if someone is a sub-human.
Ask them "Would you like to have a discussion on Philosophy."
If they reply
>"Sure! I love this topic."
Then they are sub-humans.
If they reply something like
>"Is there a particular philosophy you wish to discuss?"
Then they get it.
It's like asking people if they want to talk about Science. It sounds retarded. Now if they want to talk about Physics, then sure whatever.
>>70618745
what the fuck is that even supposed to mean
go back to your jungle
>>70618714
then what have you deduced about the explanation for morality
Taoism teaches a person to flow with life. Over the years Taoism has become many things to many people. Hundreds of variations in Taoist practice exist. Some of these practices are philosophical in nature, others are religious. Taoism makes no distinction in applying labels to its own nature. This is important since as a person, we are each a blend of many truths. The truth taught in Taoism is to embrace life in actions that support you as a person.
>>70618778
>"Is there a particular philosophy you wish to discuss?"
only problem and it's going to be a recurring one is that unless everyone's read all the same things that'd be a son-of-a-bitch to do really
>>70616672
Albert Pike, Thomas Paine
Philosophers, Warriors, ideological backbone of the American Superpower
>>70618835
does it need to be explained?
>>70616867
>these are entirely made up concepts that don't actually exist in reality in any objective fashion.
That, my friend, is philosophy.
Good: I like it
Bad: I don't like it.
>>70617342
I bet you're a fan of Kafka.
>Listening to the ideas of other individuals instead of formulating your owns
Studying philosophy outside of mathematical and economical areas is the sign of a creatively aborted individual.
Most philosophy is meaningless. In the end, none of it has any impact on how our lives actually play out, and understanding philosophy doesn't give us a greater experience.
>>70618714
>I argue that this is itself an unscientific arbitration, a behaviorist's post hoc and largely baseless explanation for morality
It is not baseless nor unscientific if we consider the facts. The fact is that "Morality" is malleable. It's different throughout history and the world. It's always changing.
If we understand that "morality" is a product of evolution then this makes sense. It needs to be different for different environments and it needs to be adaptable for harsher/simpler times.
>>70618967
Sorry Puerto Rico, not everyone is an ubermensch.
>>70619070
>If we understand that "morality" is a product of evolution then this makes sense. It needs to be different for different environments and it needs to be adaptable for harsher/simpler times.
that's called a theory, not a fact
>>70618923
I mean if you're wiling to, i don't know the fuckin answer
>>70616672
Nah, philosophy is an speculative method to know """truth""" and reality, we now have modern science (*tips fedora*) philosophy is just mental masturbation nowadays, kinda useless for most purposes
>>70617584
>NO camus
>>70618806
it means that "social constructs" don't exist
good and evil is a metaphysical metaphor for pleasure and pain
go back to your fucking cuckshed
>>70618967
>Studying philosophy outside of mathematical and economical areas is the sign of a creatively aborted individual.
General linguistics and philosophy of science are pretty creative, imo.
>>70619098
It is little more theory than suggesting different different creatures have different physical characteristics based on adaptations to their environments. We know different people to have different/malleable and adaptable morality to a large extent.
I'm simply connecting the dots by positing that malleable morality is conducive to survival.
>>70617584
D-don't bully Russell!
Ah fuck it, he was a maths guy anyway.
>>70618967
TAOISM MOTHERFUCKERS
YOU SHOULD CONSIDER SPEAKING IT
Having a set of basic guidelines can be helpful. However realistically, guidelines don’t determine how to live; Instead Taoism teaches by living you will express your nature.My personal guidelines are the following:
With care, I aid those who are extended expressions of my nature.
Be true to myself
Connect to the world as I want to be treated.
Connect to those outside my nature with decisive action.
To those unwilling to accept me for my true nature, no action is required:
Just silently let them be themselves as I remain myself.
I own nothing; I am merely a passing custodian of items outside of my nature.
>>70619218
>it means that "social constructs" don't exist
Nothing "exists" that isn't verified by senses (by definition). Many abstractions/categorisations are quite useful. It doesn't matter if they "exist" or not.
>>70619315
yeah but isn't taoism kind of a religion
>>70619179
>modern science is better than philosophy
Behold, this is your common man.
A blathering mouthbreathing who holds opinion on things he knows nothing about.
Philosophy is the trunk of the tree of knowledge, anon.
The branches are the modern sciences.
>>70618042
Who ever made this chart values feelz over realz. They're a faggot that loves Kant's fantasisies instead of Nietzsche's reality.
>>70619315
>>70619405
Taoism is a religion mixed with esoteric teachings and intense mysticism.
>healing wounds with rocks and crystals, later plagiarized by new age bullshit in the west.
Yeah, cool.
>>70617863
Not the fake existentialism softie romantic tumblrinas use to make up for their insecurities and shortcomings.
Existentialists tell you that everything happening in your life is your own doing and you have the ultimate responsibility. You cant blame anything but yourself and this leads to healthy self growth. All escape mechanisms are rendered obsolete. Whining and bitching are also eliminated.
They also tell you that there is a part of you (and the universe) which is only understandable if you can transcend the intellectual mind and reasoning. This means venturing into unknown. Again, it is not advised if you are a soft spineless faggot. You can end up completely mad or seriously damaged.
>>70619461
so is it a philosophy?
>>70619511
No, philosophy comes from reason.
Religion comes from faith.
>>70619464
Existentialism is for those too pathetic to appreciate nihilism or even understand absurdism.
>>70619461
Taoism is whatever you want it to be. It can be your religion, your mysticism, or simply a filter through which you experience life.
Taoism has never tried to convince me to purchase jo crystals
>>70619544
Sam difference.
>>70619377
but pleasure and pain are verified by senses. They do exist and are literally the feedback to all of our actions. Ancient humans understood the role of teaching and molding humanity that they had, and they assumed they were a "diffuminated" version of a kind of metaphysical pleasure and pain of the universe as a whole, called "good and evil"
>>70619315
sounds like a faggy version of egoism.
>>70616867
>philosophy is entirely ethics
>>70619544
How is it not reason?
>This tree is considered ugly and unusable to a craftsman but this means the tree will not be cut down. This makes the tree very happy.
>A fish does not care about income taxes
>>70618937
that's a nice fuckin bant right there m8y
>>70618237
>Nietzsche was a moral utopist
ARE YOU SERIOUS RIGHT NOW LOL
>>70619544
ok, so can reason be doubted, like the same way a person can doubt their faith?
>>70619135
that is my answer, I don't think it needs to be explained
>>70619315
taoism is fairly opaque to even educated westerners and many will reach misleading conclusions after studying the material, simply because of how we are wired to think compared to easterners. it is a helpful perspective to consider, it's simply hard to comprehend for someone who has put on blinders after they've been enlightened by their own intelligence.
>>70619304
because you arbitrarily weight "survival" as a universal "good", not because it has anything to do with morality proper. Not saying that I think survival is a "bad" thing, but it's a stretch to say that morality is solely the product of evolution. The connection is incidental
>>70619622
i didnt mean diffuminated, i don't know what the fucking word is, it was in gnostic texts
basically, pleasure & pain are the shadows inside plato's cave of good and evil, which exist outside the cave
>>70619676
Because it involves having faith in the system.
If you're forced to have FAITH in a system to make it work, it's a religion.
If you can actually reasonably explain why the system works, it's a philosophy.
>>70619735
Wow anon, doubt is the seed of heresy.
Careful here.
>>70619767
EMANATIONS
>>70619712
Unfortunately, yes.
>>70618937
Fuck, i almost gave a serious response.
Well played sir
>>70619836
What faith aspects are you seeing in Taoism? I have never faced an issue of faith, there's nothing to hold faith in.
>Understand what Taoism really is. Taoism is more than just a “philosophy” or a “religion”. Taoism should be understood as being: A system of belief, attitudes and practices set towards the service and living to a person’s own nature.
>>70619836
>>70619735
but no seriously can you answer me, i'm mad curious
>>70619853
It comes as no surprise to myself, if not anyone looking in on this, that the person who would ascribe the 'best' of philosophy to those mere suppositions of basic logic and banal pursuits of some mediocre forms of positivism (that usually result in the supposition of a deity in lieu of actual perception) would also be the person to so poorly understand not just Nietzsche, but it seems philosophy as a whole as well.
Perhaps you think Philosophy is some sort of stark contrast with your reality or merely a means of applying logic to reach some 'truth'.
Thinking like this is madness, and part of the reason why philosophy, especially in the modern era, is in a state of disrepair.
>Working at a register
>customer holds up an avocado and tells me the avocados here are nothing compared to the ones he ate on a holiday up north
>Tell him that since I've never been up North these avocados taste fine to me and will now make sure I never eat these high quality avocados so I can always enjoy what's readily available
>few years later
>Boss asks me why I never go anywhere for my annual leave
>tell him I don't want to overshadow what I can readily enjoy with what I can rarely enjoy
Is my line of thinking similar to any philosophers or am I just a troglodyte?
>>70620139
>Try something new
>it sucks and you wasted your money
No you're just cautious.
>>70619420
>Philosophy is the trunk of the tree of knowledge, anon. The branches are the modern sciences.
I do not approve this analogy but if you are saying that philosophy was the first science I'm not saying otherwise
>>modern science is better than philosophy
modern science is better TO discover reality and "truth"
>>70616672
philosophy is simply the act of trying to fit pieces together as we see them to either explain what we do and life in general, or how we do them, preferrably in ways that anybody can understand.
but like with anything, it gets flooded with idiots if it's perceived as valuable or as a method for them to define themselves.
Trolling for example is a form of applied philosophic theory, an artform of provoking a humorous reaction preferrably through subtle means that ideally leaves all sides of the ordeal laughing. However, as it gained popularity it began being used in three specific ways
1. By Idiots. LOL I WAS JUST TROLLING U XD to save face.
2. by the malicious, who violently lash out at others for whatever reason to feel good that they've reduced others to tears or destructive rage.
3. As a label for any person saying something you don't like.
It's lost its original philosophy, gutted of its essence and instead filled with retards and shitposters. Normies ruined trolling.
but you get the idea. Only a genuine anally cocksmuggling turbofaggot would take philosophy as a major.
>>70620211
>philosophy is simply the act of trying to fit pieces together as we see them to either explain what we do and life in general, or how we do them, preferrably in ways that anybody can understand.
NO THAT IS NOT WHAT FUCKING PHILOSOPHY IS YOU GODDAMN FUCKING PHILISTINE.
STOP FUCKING TALKING ABOUT THINGS YOU DON'T FUCKING UNDERSTAND.
>>70620254
chill my breh
>>70620254
case in point.
>>70620377
of what?
>>70619970
Everything, it's rituals, it's temples (!!!), it's gods and pretty much all the religious work behind it.
It's a religion, anon.
Scientology too is a religion, and they call it a "belief system".
>>70619975
You're asking for an answer to a question that can be answered in multiple ways, anon.
Yes and no, perhaps.
It all depends on what do logic you follow.
>>70620117
To whom are you even talking to?
I'm nobody.
Nobody.
>>70620191
Modern science was founded by Galileo, an italian philosopher.
He birthed modern science by creating the scientific method, a system which is the crowning achievement of all of its life and pretty much the foundations of modern science.
Modern science is literally an applied philosophical theory made by Galileo.
>>70620405
>>70619738
>because you arbitrarily weight "survival" as a universal "good", not because it has anything to do with morality proper. Not saying that I think survival is a "bad" thing, but it's a stretch to say that morality is solely the product of evolution. The connection is incidental
I think I understand now, but the link is intrinsic. Survival is not "good" or "bad" but the binary determinant of wether something even gets to exist, see?
For instance, lets say some ancient humans had the natural "moral" inclination towards murdering their own offspring. All the time.
We can understand what the result would be, none of these peopel with this inclination would survive to the next generation and this tendency would die out and therefore not even exist. Like this, we should be able to see how "morality" is influential (though not necessarily 100% but to SOME extent) to survival. Basically, the one we should expect to see is not one that is necessarily good or bad but the one which at the very least did not interfere with survival or the one which actually helped survival.
Imagine a tribe with a strong natural inclination towards being extremely racist, but intensely friendly to their own tribe. This COULD lead to them being destroyed by other tribes but also lead to them conquering and being prosperous. Whichever of these two factors could decide wether this morality would be present or not in future generations.
Ofcourse, morality is not 100% genetic. The strongest morality is the one which is adaptable during a single generation and not just between. That is the one we have with certain tendencies built in like aversion for murder, empathy for others etc. But even these aren't the same for every person. You have sociopaths which care little for others no matter what is taught to them.
>>70620458
Boy i engrished hard on this post.
Remember kids, multitasking is bad.
>>70620319
People who try to talk about Philosophy in the way they are doing in this thread makes my blood fucking boil.
As an analogy imagine if /pol/ was flooded with people saying 'there wouldn't be economic problems if the governments just printed more money for everyone'
That's what it's like to watch people """""""""discuss""""""""" philosophy, which at this point isn't 'philosophy' but just some disgusting perverted form of ethics or some children's version of logic.
>>70620523
>People who try to talk about Philosophy in the way they are doing in this thread makes my blood fucking boil.
So basically pretty much everyone in the world, right?
Where do you think you are, anon?
>>70620466
oh, right, got it
>>70619589
Well, you dont have to subscribe to a way of thinking. You just take the things that suits you and make up your own philosophy.
Isnt that what nietzsche is talking about ultimately? You cant be a ubermensch if you are a mindless drone who is accepting other's way of life (because you think they know better) while you have your own unique way of life remain undiscovered.
>>70617342
OK, you're good, roach. Keep clear of Ankara and Bartın.
Also, I can't but agree, more than 90% of people pretending to discuss philosophy just spew buzzwords or plain fallacies. Same for majority of modern philosophers who purse purse instead of truth.
Here on /pol this rate approaches 100%.
>>70616672
Philosophy can't be "ruined", unless you espouse an opinion that any logical mental activity is somehow ruining. You can build a pile of 100kg of worthy and beneficial philosophical treaties and dialogues that actually make sense of your life.
However modern "philosophy", as much as modern society, is ruins manifested.
>>70620613
>You cant be a ubermensch if you are a mindless drone who is accepting other's way of life
>>70620562
I'm in the most stupid time in history to give a fuck about anyone being able to understand things or present ideas cogently.
I've made my peace with that and I can abide by it.
However, people fucking talking about philosophy as if they understand what the fuck they're running their mouths about, and then having the goddamn gall to go about telling OTHER fucking people that it's their goddamn ignorant bullshit that's right?
That I can't abide.
>>70620139
you need to be yoloing more australia, always remember to carpe diem before you go to bed
>>70620676
>pursue purse
Overdid my Engrish there a bit.
>>70620718
enlighten us about REAL philosophy then anon
remember, you got 2000 characters top and everyone is gonna respond you with frog pics
>>70620718
Embrace it, anon.
We killed God, this is our reward.
>>70620718
>le superior philosophy makes me understand le world and the truth without trial, experiment and mostly by piggybacking scientific results
Fries and ketchup with that hamburger, please. Earning all of that $$$$ with my STEM degree is an energy consuming business
>>70620730
>>70620676
филocoфия мoжeт быть нaйдeн кaк тoлькo бopющийcя зaмиpaть
>>70620796
>>70620796
>>70620813
>>70620899
See, this is what i mean.
This world has become an orgy of memes.
Embrace it, or get blown away like dust.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wC-CfmiDAg
>>70616672
>is philosophy pretentious /pol/?
No.
>has the concept been ruined by insincere people who wanted to sound smart?
No. Those people may exist, but they hardly ruin the concept.
Case in point, you. Your insincere philosophical inquiry can still generate an interesting discussion when presented to the proper audience. Obviously not here though. This place is filled with drooling retards.
>>70620813
DUDE
WORKING FOR THE JEW
LMAO
OP you should be well aware that us Australians love philosophy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_WRFJwGsbY
>>70620950
>This place
>>70619315
nobody is replying to you, give it a rest with the chink bible shillery
>>70620950
are retards people? like do they have the ability to reflect?
>>70621038
It turns out these philosophy threads are the worst place to go to find open minded people
>>70616672
itt: dumb fucks who haven't read much philosophy. But /pol/ is a home for uncritical conformists who like to think they're edgy. It's definitely not a place for lovers of truth.
>>70620952
>implying i am not self employed
>>70620931
>he doesn't believe in meme magic after the 4U plane crash near Le Bains with no survivors, Ankara pepe bombs, india launching the Scat satellite into orbit and countless more wonders of lord Kek
>>70621075
>philosophy
>true
Most people who study philosophy that I know are very pretentious
>Oh you know organic and biochemistry but do you really know life?
>>70620950
>Obviously not here though
i'm really tired of the driveby reddit posts and was surprised to read one in this thread of all things.
do you all coordinate it?
>>70621079
>meme magic
Oh come on, you silly willy, the truth is way more fascinating than that.
>>70621118
Because studying philosophy is a pretentious thing to do
>>70621175
Oh i know
>>70621212
>le jews boogeyman
This is so avant-garde, anon.
I like you.
We'll have an orgy quite soon, you're invited.
>>70616672
Not true philosophy, but student in philosophy are pretentious as fuck, they think knowing a guy who said platitudes is the truth
t. student in philosophy
>>70621118
>Oh you know organic and biochemistry but do you really know life?
that sounds like something an 15 year old would say
>>70617342
this
>>70621101
Truth is something that is not a deliberate or unconscious lie. I dont believe this anon is referring to "absolute" or "higher" truths.
Stop embarrassing yourself.
>>70621137
If you think intelligent discussion is to be had on pol, you're not capable of it, or haven't been here very long. Trust me, I've been here all summer.
>>70621327
>dumb people think smart and interesting people spreading knowledge is pretentious, or maybe racist? bigot? privileged? MANSPLAINING!111!
Like pottery.
I love this world so fucking much.
>>70621308
Homo ass and gay sex are not my forte, but thank you for the invitation my smug, but alas unemployed friend
>>70621437
Why not?
They're fun.
We're having a party here, there's even Jesus, Apollo and Freud.
>>70621494
if it's not a blood orgy your party is shit
>>70618937
HAHHAHAHAHAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHHA
>>70621494
It's monday morning and you are already huffing glue.
What can i say, your dedication to the cause is astonishing
>>70620458
Galileo was an astronomer, physicist, engineer and mathematician too not just a philosopher. He didn’t birth modern science, he played a major role in the scientific revolution, he didn’t create the scientific method, Alhazen (he was a philosopher too) did emphasis on experimental data and reproducibility first, Galileo made a new better one, that doesn’t mean that’s entirely the one we use now, advances have been made since then. Nothing about that means that “Modern science is literally an applied philosophical theory” You literally pulled that out your ass, you probably know all of this so I thnk your post is kinda dishonest to be honest
>>70621424
how can you understand this wrong what i wanted to say ? I don't say that being interested by philosopher are bad, i say copying people who said things without understanding or think by yourself is retarded.
>>70621533
Quando sei di famiglia benestante e puoi permetterti di non lavorare per il resto della tua vita, dovrai pure occupare il tempo in qualche modo, no?
Dammi del decadente se vuoi, francamente non m'importa.
>>70621607
>your post is kinda dishonest
How rude of you, my fellow mexican friend.
>>70620458
>Modern science is literally an applied philosophical theory made by Galileo.
literally one of the dumbest things i have read on this board
>>70621404
>tfw failed miserably to organize political literature reading and discussions thread
>it just drowned in trump kek vult maymay
I've been stupid enough to be here for 1.5 years now. Can confirm.
>>70621613
Isn't that exactly what you're doing?
Or you think you're being original now with this whole "hurr people should follow themselves" reprehensible rhetoric of yours?
>>70621652
>shitpostare anzichè viaggiare per il mondo con il cash del papi
Cazzeggiare su internet tutto il giorno tra 4chan, pornhub e i video di diprè deve essere un autentico spasso, la mia invidia è non contenible
>>70621778
should people not follow themselves?
>>70621747
I'll tell you, a thread like this has a projected durability of around 60 posts, then it turns into utter shitposting as it reaches more visibility on the front page, where trolls and memesters are usually lurking around.
It is up to you to use, gather and understand these first 60 posts in the best way you can, especially for knowledge and different points of view that may broaden your very own pov.
>>70616672
>is philosophy pretentious /pol/?
No.
>has the concept been ruined by insincere people who wanted to sound smart?
I don't understand what you are asking. Philosophy is a discipline, the discipline that allowed Shannon to develop circuits when applying Boolean Algebra, which is what all computers are based upon. It's just a discipline like any other and this is just one thing it did. We are not talking about performative-dance or something.
I know you guys mean well. You probably have met just a handful of people who say they care about philosophy and it was shit so you think philosophy is shit, but none of you know what you are talking about.
>>70621842
>>70621778
>>70621719
>>70621652
Grazie.
>>70621842
Il mondo è una merda ovunque, dopo un po' ti stufi di viaggiare.
Stai parlando come un povero ora, mi dai fastidio.
Smetti di essere povero, per cortesia.
>>70617342
Nicely put, roach
>>70621778
No it's not what i'm doing, and i don't think at all that i'm being original, but if people really understood this then they'd do it : they dont do it, so they dont understand it. The job of a philosopher is to create new concept, and we dont do this unfortunatly
>>70622064
And why is that, uh?
You said you're a philosophy student, maybe you're either in first year or you haven't reached the philosophical decadence courses of the last years yet, so you know jackshit about why nobody creates anything of value anymore.
Or maybe you're just a lying, smug frenchie bastard.
>>70616867
you just philosophied now
>>70616672
Philosophy is a waste of time, only fags care about that shit
>>70622064
>>70622171
you both sound like idiots
>>70622171
Well you seems upset, maybe thats because the truth hurt, i have nothing to prove tho. You dont even try to refute what i'm saying, because you know it's true : the philosophy is dead today, at least in the teaching domain
>>70616672
No. Who gives a shit what people make something? If you enjoy it or want to pursue it then don't let others stop you.
By the way, quoting philosophical things does not make you sound "smart." Nothing can really make a person sound smart unless you're some retarded moron that thinks knowledge equals intelligence or any of that nonsense.
>>70622021
>Il mondo è una merda ovunque, dopo un po' ti stufi di viaggiare.
>>70622474
Why should i refuse the obvious?
I'm not saying you're wrong, i just exposed your ignorance to the real question, why is that the obvious?
What happened?
And apparently, you can't give me an answer, so i'm being right, my dear philosophy freshman.
Call me mad all you want, i don't care.
God is dead.
>>70622677
I gave the reason since the start but whatever, you assume things knowing nothing, thats why it really seems that you are a student in philosophy too because you are pretentious as fuck, you have the same problem as every student in philosophy that i saw
>>70617813
>All morals are memes though.
Not true, there are objective moral truths like the moral laws of Allah in the Quran. It is what God likes and dislikes and as a good muslim my intention is to please God so they are the only relevant measures of what is considered good or bad actions.
It is also the rules which we will be judged on judgement day, so for all practical purposes they are the good or bad. Only atheists have no moral or no way to view morality.
>>70622892
You're running in circles now, Pierre.
Come on, you can do better.
>>70622946
good old meme without argument
>>70623019
Don't mind him, he is a neet and needs to shitpost on /pol/ to feel important. Every (You) he receives fosters his delusions further
>>70623019
>>70623105
I love this fucking place.
>>70623105
more assumptions knowing nothing, you really are a living proof of what i meant
>>70623105
>Every (You) he receives fosters his delusions further
but that's my favorite part
>>70623166
>>70623179
>>70623212
(You)
>>70623179
>>70623212
Philosophy is shit. Read things that interest you and stop jerking your gerkin to Plato.
Ernst Junger, George Orwell, and Malcolm Muggeridge were and are better than the vast majority of modern philosophers, because they showed how to live by example. Weary Dunlop, whose war diaries I'm reading, was worth a thousand Nietzsches, because instead of being a miserable old bastard rotting away in solitude, he was a doctor and soldier who led his men through hell on earth.
>>70623567
But Nietzsche was not a miserable old bastard rotting away in solitude, anon.
That was Schopenhauer, Nietzsche was a brothel addicted nymphomaniac.
>>70623676
He was miserable, a bastard, rotted away due to his poor health, and wrote huge tracts on why solitude was awesome.
I will concede that, at one point in his life, he was young.
>>70623956
He was a frequent brothel guest, even male ones.
Schopenhauer was the "r9k" philosopher, not Nietzsche.
Unless someone is /fit/, rich, and able to get mad pussy I see no reason to listen to their "philosophy."
>>70624103
>He was a frequent brothel guest, even male ones.
And? Whoring around doesn't make him a better man.
>>70617584
roll-ing
>>70624324
And liking solitude doesn't make him any worse.
>>70617813
Morals are not a meme.
The simplest way to examine this, is look at what it means to promise something.
If there is no effort (ever) made to uphold a promise, then there is no value to the word promise. It might as well not exist.
Of course not all promises will be held. Sometimes it is impossible. Sometimes it is profoundly impractical. Sometimes someone didn't care to uphold the promise.
That is immoral.
Of course there's always room for deception and uncertainty, it's a complex world and if it wasn't, some people would make it complex to hide their broken promises (and other immorality).
I don't see why you think absolutes have to exist in order for morals to exist. That isn't to say these absolutes don't exist, it's just that it's impractical to get to the absolutes of every situation and we have to guess a lot.
We go into more detail for a court case.
But even if these absolutes didn't exist, that didn't make morality obsolete or non-existant. Even monkeys that observe an aggressive alpha chimp out over something and then just cause he's angry hurts one of the lower class males will recognise that he unfairly got hit and will groom /comfort the beta that they normally don't spent a second glance looking at.
>>>/his/
>>70619614
t. Modern art
>>70617584
>Kierkegaard
>oh shit nigger what are you doing
Are you actually retarded?
>>70624372
underrated
>>70616867
>implying memes aren't real
W E W L A D
>>70628006
Well just putting it very simply, memes are just ideas spreading from person to person.
As such the concept of a promise is a meme.
Just because something is a meme doesn't mean that it "doesn't exist" or has no value, that's not what I'm arguing. What I AM arguing is that it's not based on some objective eternally unchangeable standard.
I'm saying that what we percieve to be morality (a sense of right and wrong) is a product of the rationalizations we make for the emotions and situations we experience. I.e.: Feeling empathy for beta, disgust towards alphas actions and the thoughts we make about it afterwards all coalesce into the resulting concept we share with eachother and call "morality". Put simply, when we see something we don't like and then say that that thing was bad and doing those kinds of things are bad, that is the meme of morality. The feelings and thoughts are all "real", but the concept at the end here is an abstract meme passed on.
This has created, I think, a sort of all-encompassing meme, where we think that evilness and goodness exist independent of us as humans and isn't subjective. But is objective and can be reasoned to be found and must hold true for others.
This is incorrect, but this meme is pervasive in almost all philosophy.
