[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 8cup / arepa / bcb / hisrol / hkon9 / namefags / vg / vichan ]

/philosophy/ - Philosophy

Start with the Greeks

Catalog   Archive

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Flag *
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Sister Boards [ Literature ] [ History ] [ Christ ] [ Religion ] [ Politics ]

File: 1411489462074.jpg (83.18 KB, 322x421, 322:421, Plato&Aristotle.jpg)

ccf87a No.86[Reply]

Rules:

1. Respect the Global Rules.

2. Moderation will be kept to a minimum.

3. No spamming.

4. Spoiler NSFW images.

/philosophy/ resources: https://8ch.net/philosophy/resources.html

Post last edited at

ccf87a No.3643

File: 1456239360186-0.jpg (513.08 KB, 2048x1366, 1024:683, philosophy.jpg)

File: 1456239360188-1.jpg (1.07 MB, 3672x3024, 17:14, Start with the Greeks.jpg)

File: 1456239360188-2.jpg (415.66 KB, 1858x1354, 929:677, lit guide to philosophy.jpg)

For beginners:




File: 07ec7fa2bd1ee2a⋯.jpg (169.94 KB, 753x800, 753:800, maxstirn.jpg)

1a66fd No.6466[Reply]

Hello anons, fellow seeker of Life here.

It seems to me like we live in a paradoxical world, in which we have no say over the creation of our existence, no say over the determination of the biological factors which shape our minds, and no proper say over the finding of meaning and fulfilment. I've dabbled with existentialism, structuralism, spiritualism, rationalism, and many of the forms they take. I know there is much I don't understand, and much more I haven't looked at or pondered. I have come to a few conclusions about life, beauty, and truth, but I have the recurring feeling like many of those conclusions, much of the wisdom I hold is self-referential and circular. I believe that the fundamental "graph of life" is an upward oscillation of "good", and not an exponentiality though it may look like that from very close. I know that I wish to, atleast and like everyone else, "feel" free, but I also know that "feeling free" is not the same as "being free". I wish to be free and know it as best I can, not feel free and believe it to be real.

In short, I want to become what I am, and I wish for that to be divine. I know hybris is dangerous, but I also know that calling out hybris is not enough to guard you from it. I know I don't believe in determinism, but I believe that determinism is real if it is believed.

I wish, or believe to wish to satisfy my ego or "will to power", to ultimately ascend into apotheosis. Not immediately, but eventually (whenever that eventuality arises). Why do I wish to become one god, one among many? Because I believe it to be my birthright to know what "all this stuff" is about. I don't believe in the inherent cruelty of Life, because I know the opposite exists, namely the good, the true, and the beautiful.

I know I have to play the game to "win", and I have sort of a grasp on how to play it, namely "playing it true", but I don't know which game really to play, because I think most of the games one is presented with are more or less distractions, many of which, I feel like, were created by those who are playing "the real game".

Having recognized that there is "the real game", I call it Life proper, where do I find the table of players to play it with? In geopolitics? In my own personal relations? In Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

bf2a46 No.6467

I have no idea what you're saying but I'm going to hijack the thread to call out the anon on this board who told me to listen to "Great Idea of Philosophy" by Prof. Daniel N. Robinson.

I skipped to the last audio track and he's a theist. His last few sentences are moronic. What we need is a philosopher who is an atheist to record a 60 track CD for profit to counter this over hyped romantic who thinks humanity deserves pain, and who who hates skepticism.


9420be No.6468

Every time I come to this board, every few weeks or so, I come expecting that there will be no new threads or posts. Despite how dead it is, that still often isn't the case. But I still hold hopes for the future.


a59e01 No.6469

File: ea82613b68c51c9⋯.jpg (16.96 KB, 625x357, 625:357, DiU3rFoWsAAGElM.jpg)

File: ff0403ed479f224⋯.jpg (105.6 KB, 800x800, 1:1, DiVI-azV4AAsL54.jpg)

>>6468

We're all gonna have to go to Reddit or Instagram soon. Wherever we go we have to outrun the boomers menace or we will lose IQ without convincing them of anything, which means Facebook and now Twitter (hello Donald) are no gos.




File: 828fab9229fc1cf⋯.jpg (110.25 KB, 736x611, 736:611, 46932cae4593fbfeda000bd7a9….jpg)

219831 No.6465[Reply]

I just wanted you to know.



File: 06bf09e65415034⋯.png (150.03 KB, 250x317, 250:317, WikipediaBaudrillard200406….png)

b88657 No.6434[Reply]

Jean Baudrillard was a French sociologist, philosopher, cultural theorist, political commentator, and photographer. He is best known for his analyses of media, contemporary culture, and technological communication, as well as his formulation of concepts such as simulation and hyperreality. He wrote about diverse subjects, including consumerism, gender relations, economics, social history, art, Western foreign policy, and popular culture. Among his best known works are Simulacra and Simulation (1981), America (1986), and The Gulf War Did Not Take Place (1991). His work is frequently associated with postmodernism and specifically post-structuralism.

Dude was pretty based. Wasn't afraid to name the jew.

b88657 No.6435

He wrote a lot about hyperreality. Individuals may find themselves, for different reasons, more in tune or involved with the hyperreal world and less with the physical real world.

Seems like a lot of NEETs who hang out on the internet


1310a3 No.6441

>Wasn't afraid to name the jew

In what way ?


c6d89c No.6447

>Dude was pretty based.

Amen.

>Wasn't afraid to name the jew.

Oh you. Crawl back to /pol/.


b7ead4 No.6464

amazing how FOUCAULT is the better semiotician




File: 358e45ec1cc3903⋯.jpg (17.06 KB, 220x317, 220:317, 1526592012855[1].jpg)

9aa247 No.6328[Reply]

Please no philosophers that weren't insightful enough not to be atheist

7 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

6aaf50 No.6402

Anything that talks about the wholeness of being that isn't boring, nihilistic or epicurist.

>>6373

>Philosophy is about accepting and preparing for death.

WRONG


9751e2 No.6404

>>6402

>>6382

>t. Haven't read the Phaedo


3be81c No.6407

>>6328

Buddha


1c88c0 No.6412

Aristotle, as far as I know. If you want something short, there's the spurious "On Virtues and Vices". If you want something meatier, there's always the Nicomachian Ethics, Magna Moralia, and Eudemian Ethics.


5a1dc3 No.6461

>>6412

Doesn't Aristotle recommend moderation though?

He would say refusing to drink could be conceived as rude or anti-social, but being drunk isn't socially beneficial and drinking any amount regularly is unhealthy.

He would advocate a glass of wine at a dinner or party once a month.




File: 41e582c00d088f4⋯.png (386.03 KB, 426x640, 213:320, C__Data_Users_DefApps_AppD….png)

bbf6d2 No.6442[Reply]

Any advices in life that was useful to you or that you still remember today? Would you share it in this thread, please ? Thank you

38b5d8 No.6443

Always sage lazy threads.


bbf6d2 No.6444

>>6443

Okay. But do you have another one ?


0487a3 No.6449


e7cb54 No.6460

>>6449

Sam Harris locked his ass in the Vancouver debate




File: 1427423128230.jpg (187.58 KB, 1024x768, 4:3, Space.jpg)

6802f7 No.1011[Reply]

Do we truly have free will or are we just the current manifestations of a deterministic series of events that started with the big bang?
64 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

6802f7 No.3732

>>2944

>science supports me

You're right, but as John Gray would argue in Straw Dogs you shouldn't say such things because science is more often used to the ends of human achievement, and so progresses from useful error. It may discover truth but this is secondary relative to the primary objective. Furthermore liberal humanists often use science of naturalism in a bunch of mental gymnastics to try and justify the idea of progress.


6dcf5c No.5462

Free will and determinism are both false.

Free will is impossible, because you can't choose your internal properties.

Physics is actually non-deterministic. Even physics doesn't know what it's going to do next.

And that's why this argument can't get anywhere.


e3bc23 No.6426

>Do we truly have free will or are we just the current manifestations of a deterministic series of events that started with the big bang?

This is a false dichotomy. "Free" doesn't necessarily mean "free from the physical laws of the universe."


702f66 No.6432

Well, you are a human born in 21st century combine that with cultural, environmental, geographical, religious, sexual, racial and many other factors beyond your control it stands to reason that whatever free will you may have it is heavily contested and compromised by the circumstances that have been forced upon you.

So even if you were able to break away from your current situation would you still be free or just the product of the times, culture and circumstances you came from?


8cd4bb No.6459

There is no such thing as free will in this reality. It is as though we live in a binary equation. 1's and zero's . We have up or down. right or left. dark to light. you can go on forever in pairs. a part and its counter part. Therefore how can one truly have free-will, if one always has to make a choice given to him based on the parameters of a dimensional hierarchy that most are unable to even comprehend; much less manipulate. It is a researched fact that the sub-conscious makes decisions before we are consciously aware of the decision. Therefore life in a sense is drawn out for us based on our inner most desires and wants. You really do get what you want, but most people have not the slightest clue as to what they really want. They are lost in a consumerist society where they lust after a item they know nothing about. Money would not exist if there was no debt and the U.S Dollar is the number one exported good in america and is responsible for the past 30 years of war because of this little known fact. To say we have free will is almost laughable. We don't know what free will would even begin to feel like. Most would reject it because most like having their hands held. Free Will died with our dreams a long time ago




File: 6a7a4dfdfe5952b⋯.png (130.29 KB, 1200x1932, 100:161, Infinite_regress_en.svg.png)

3eb282 No.6283[Reply]

Hey board. What's your stance on the problem of epistemic regress, and where do you all fall on Agrippa's Trilemma?

Foundationalism, coherentism, or infinitism?

I'm personally an infinitist, although I also accept there may be a point of justification that is impossible to express and articulate and so justification itself may be a failed project. For most of our reasoning, we base our thought off of psychological maxims that act as 'just good enough' foundations which allow us do the necessary legwork to pursue our ends.

041274 No.6431

Our beliefs are ultimately supported by foundational axioms. Agrippa's Trilemma is only true insofar as it is impossible to explain why an axiom is true. Infinitism is only true in this inability. Coherentism is retarded in assuming inferences are more foundational if they are grouped together, which does nothing to explain away the epistemological vacuum. Foundationalism is true if and only if we accept the existence of the truth of axioms that, just because unexplainable, could still exist. I hold that either the truth of axioms exist, or there simply is no such thing as knowledge. But the very possibility that the former is true is enough reason to pursue it. Infinitism is also retarded and might as well just be an admission that there is no knowledge either.


d5be6c No.6458

Infinitist claims may be epistemically justified by unconditional probabilistic regress, so no foundation needs to be assumed.




File: 8c8e4102450dafb⋯.gif (1.98 MB, 360x240, 3:2, 1523563103389.gif)

c7725f No.6452[Reply]

Is masturbation rape?

b7fa05 No.6457

>>6452

Only when women do it.




File: 48f1195cdc449c3⋯.png (7.98 MB, 4152x3060, 346:255, 9562227593.png)

1ffa42 No.6320[Reply]

I want your honest opinions on this. what do you think about it? what would you do to improve it? I'm looking for some really serious deep philosophical critical thinking discussion on this. I love the good conversations. lets go for it then.

https://mewch.net/fringe/res/2736.html

13 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

1ffa42 No.6455

File: 3c906202eae25cf⋯.png (2.66 MB, 4744x2224, 593:278, 34933346326.png)


1ffa42 No.6456

thread update because mewch is totally fucked

>>>/fringe/120566


8efba9 No.6463

File: c58cbe4dc4b42fa⋯.jpg (3.35 MB, 5007x3060, 1669:1020, disregard answers accuire ….jpg)

>>6454

>ignores all constructive criticism from the thread

>makes a new one with almost the same false information.

>>what would you do to improve it?

>Try making it intelligible to people who use means of communication other than greentext stories and memes.


8efba9 No.6470


8efba9 No.6471

>>6454

Anon, you're amazing paranoid, at least argue against the points made against your pictures, you're making everyone who understands the secret Saturn worship look bad, like me.




File: 1451990559803.jpg (35.06 KB, 480x640, 3:4, 1423024347220.jpg)

d9777a No.3260[Reply]

Could someone please disprove solipsism?

79 posts and 6 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

ba7cff No.6250


a70d8e No.6253

>>3260

No. The entire multiverse is one large interconnected system. So it's not so much that "I am the multiverse" as much as "the idea of a separate individual was factually incorrect to begin with and a bad assumption".

Next.


d05e17 No.6427

>>6253

>factually incorrect

Calling something "factual" doesn't make it "factual," you fucking idiot.

>Next.

You haven't said anything meaningful enough to warrant the arrogance necessary for the full stop at the end of a non-sentence. Kill yourself.


0071d3 No.6429

1. If solipsism were true, you wouldn't be subject to the world.

2. You are subject to the world.

3. Therefore, solipsism is false.

You're welcome. Now the absurdist idiot can come along and show us how validity doesn't real. Any honest contention should spend equal effort discerning how this is sound as not.


585037 No.6451

>>6429

>You are subject to the world.

How so?




File: 4a75209e64620c8⋯.jpg (73.91 KB, 410x272, 205:136, 1515890376808.jpg)

59f1ae No.6439[Reply]

Does it make sense to try to self-actualize others?



File: 55447f8e176a30a⋯.png (342.34 KB, 2518x1024, 1259:512, 1510976926165.png)

7648c9 No.6436[Reply]

Are ideas subject to convergent evolution?

0faf7f No.6437




File: 4f2f1c69772be32⋯.jpg (13.68 KB, 360x362, 180:181, 5641654651.jpg)

a59cb7 No.6184[Reply]

When it comes to most global policies, at least from the ones that I have seen, most of them place an immiediate value on human life. For example, the goal of all modern systems is ultimately- have a set of humans live longer, healthier, or something along those lines. When did this become the norm? Is this due to the Enlightenment placing focus on MAN rather than God?

11 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

48321e No.6433

>>6419

>denying that the nadir of western civilization wasn't when we were most Christian.

Read "the Darkening Age."


f1f741 No.6438

>>6433

Read "Fuck Off and Die."


1d9855 No.6445

>>6433

>The dark ages happened because the majority of people were Christian at the time.

How fucking retarded can one person get.

The collapse of the Roman empire happened due to an invasion by Finno Mongolian pagans, Christians straight up had nothing to do with driving people into the dark ages, anything done like Wars between European nations was due to mostly family disputes, attempts to unify tribes, or tribes killing each other. Multiple Christian scholars helped advance science, philosophy, and Math, a lot of discoveries were lost because of how underrated the dark ages are and weren't rediscovered until the 17th century.

>>6438

He probably doesn't read, he just buys books and shoves them up his ass.


1d9855 No.6446

>>6433

Also the Darkening Age was literally a biased propaganda piece the likes of Black Athena, it's grossly overestimated like the idea of the Christian Dark Ages in general.

>Hey look a few bad things happened so it's all Christianity's fault, now become a atheist liberal goy

>Hey look a few similarities in cultures from Egypt and Ethiopia in Greece I guess that We Wuz Kangz is real now, all of white people's achievements are disqualified, go out and chase BBC you fucking gentile sluts


0d0a36 No.6462

File: b400fbe4bbc5df8⋯.png (923.05 KB, 640x5040, 8:63, dark ages meme.png)




File: 128e572b9ef4a27⋯.gif (2.39 MB, 448x252, 16:9, 128e572b9ef4a271ddc334d32c….gif)

bcaf86 No.6428[Reply]

I understand that emotions and sensations are electrochemical responses within the brain, but more so on a metaphysical level, how can my emotions be regarded as physically existing? Are they something 3 dimensional or do they exist in another dimension like time?

26cf97 No.6430

"Extra-dimensional" is just a designation for things not naturally understood. "Spiritual substance" or "supernatural" would be equivalently valid. Saying something is "another dimension" is just a deceptive way materialists try to insinuate everything is of material consequence.




Delete Post [ ]
[]
Previous [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]
| Catalog | Nerve Center | Cancer
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 8cup / arepa / bcb / hisrol / hkon9 / namefags / vg / vichan ]