Assume that the reason people evolved the capacity for emotions is that they act as an efficient heuristic to process scenarios which are uncomputable otherwise (high number of variables, unknown relationship between events, etc.). Does this suggest that the emotional response to an idea can be used as an indicator for it's actual merits, when no other method is available? If so, does this mean automatically disregarding emotional arguments is purposeful ignorance?
Have you taken the brown pill yet, mateys?
it's a tough pill to swallow! The brown pill was founded in 1999 by Sir Reginald Brownpill, who presents and narrates the attached video.
Forget red and blue pills, brown pills are the way of the future.
Video related. Please leave your questions, comments, and concerns below about this radical new paradigm of thinking!f
Swallow the brown pill today! Red pills are for fedora fucking wearing faggots, blue pills are for the ignorant masses. Ignore the other le epin /pol/ maymays, this one is the readl deal.437347
other board
What is a philosophical viewpoint that, on the scale from absolute Asceticism to absolute Hedonism, leans 75% towards Asceticism?
Should we perhaps add a sticky to this board with some 'recommended reading' and some rules or something? Here is my attempt at contributing some possible works to such a list:
* A History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russel
* Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus by L. Wittgenstein
* Philosophical Investigations by L. Wittgenstein
* Critique of Pure Reason by I. Kant
* Critique of Practical Reason by I. Kant
* Critique of Judgement by I. Kant
Perhaps the question is, what should the criteria be?