/philosophy/ - Philosophy

much spooks

>>4818

Oh, I remember you from /lit/. Thank you for posting your blog, I will be deferring to it soon.

>>4820

I've never gone to /lit/, but please, shill me over there all you want :)

why the gookese?

google translate to the rescue:

"Why do people wear pants?

When you take off your pants you either pull the right leg first

Or would anyone think that it is comical if there is anyone to argue with whether to draw from the left foot first?

In what order should we cut when cutting crosses

If you are fighting hard among Christians, are you still thinking it is comical?

It's funny.

I treat the value which I do not have as ...... as having it, respect it, even betting its legitimacy to fight with others

But ...

Is not this an intellectual activity?

What can I do if I use something other than intelligence ...?

It is possible for anyone to follow the truth ... also to the beasts without intelligence

But can it be impossible for a beast to give the same value as the truth and to face down?

Some say that religion makes people human beings a refuter, but it is totally misunderstood

Religion is the product of extremely high intellectual activity

Religion can be said to be the most human-made invention in human history"

Id say: "Religion is the product of extremely high intellectual activity" aimed at denying and obfuscating the fact that absolute truth, whether it exists or not, lies firmly outside the reach of mere monkeys like us. As its impossible for a society to fully agree on it, making it the basis for it is foolish and short-sighted, aPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>4801

These image guides were grandfathered in from times past. The board staff isn't really thrilled with them either. If we can reach a consensus they can be changed. The post itself would have to be nuked and replaced, which is no problem. What would be really great is if we could drop it all into a sub-page. Board staff have no idea how this could be accomplished, and we've never seen an example of doing this through sub-pages anywhere on 8chan.

Anyway, the gist behind the sticky suggestions are to offer a path for beginners. Steer clear of the advanced stuff.

Drop suggestions/objections/etc. in this thread.

>>4778

>>4778

>And what would you consider an ethical truth, if such things do exist?

Are you asking me (OP)?

Regardless, it's hard to say. I guess it would be a true statement which logically follows from true premises, e.g. some proof of natural rights, I personally don't believe these exist in any meaningful way as an atheist.

>>4768

>The problem of induction has not been solved, from what I know. For this very reason, empiricists are all dumbasses.

Induction can only prove that a conclusion is highly likely, not that it is certain, how does this mean that it is useless? It is the sole method we rely upon for epidemiological studies, for example.

This goes for >>4783 too ("empiricists are retarded")

>>4785

The problem isn't the high likelihood of induction, it is relying on induction only. To clarify, I only mean those who are solely empiricists are retarded, which doesn't mean that empirical proofs or thinking is worthless. It is just they can't quite "prove" anything

>>4785

Highly likely is as good as 'I don't know so here is a guess' when it comes to logic. Philosophy isn't interested in guessing, it's interested in knowing.

The is/ought problem isn't a problem except for scientism kiddies and cavemen (radical empiricists). Of fucking course you can't draw necessary universals (natural laws) from contingent individuals. Of fucking course you can't draw necessary ends from contingent determinate sense experience. The only way to draw a should from an is is with a Hegelian auto determining concept since what the concept is is fly what it should be by it's own free logical development.

>>4593

A democracy is the rule of sinners

>>4772

all forms of government are the rule of sinners.

0/10 fedora tier attempt at pretending to be a christian.

>>4776

You didn't understand. Democracy is a system designed to give sinners whatever they want. It could be rightly called the rule of sin.

Who is a better hero? Jesus or Socrates?

>>4788

monarchy is the rule of sinners unless it is specifically God's Kingdom and nothing less

>>4524

Your description of Marx is spot on, duderino.

>>4479

but I bet he could help get me and muh mang rene some grade A poon.

>>4521

>Foucault

He was a sodomite

>>4522

>no Anselm of Canterbury

>>4773

>No Erasmus

>>4774

>papists

>>1969

yor literally autistic arnt you

hue

I lol'd op

>>1974

Not in Deutsch, du Hurensohn.

>>4735

I don't speak Mexican, Ivan

Well it can be considered philosophical in some regards to civilization. Like the commie fucks who everytime they get hungry just burn in the middle of the fire of their town, respawn and reclaim their stuff while the /pol/ people are building towns.

>>1745

i dont believe in sacred geometry

>Minecraft shilling

>On /philosophy/

but why?

Okay, let's hijack the stale old thread that has topped the page for a moment and ask seriously, why has 8chan's membership shriveled up so badly? The small boards have basically died.

>>4767

It's a normal thing with non-leftist-hegemony social networks. It requires some level of non-degeneracy to continue posting. Actually giving a damn about discussions, checking back more than twice, that sort of thing.

I don't know why it happens exactly, but it's reliable enough that a discussion could be had about the causes, and the cause found. However, see above, re: effort.

>>922

or just a cuck?

>>922

Useless questions.

Useless sayings.

An unstoppable force meets an immovable object. Don't be caught in useless loops.

This is why I hate drug users. You're not enlightened, m8, you just took weed spiced with LSD!

You try to hint at some good points OP.

The saying "The greatest hero is the one who's okay being labeled the villain" is actually something I've thought of as well for myself.

I suppose you just reinforce the bias of some people here who think that anything esoterical is against logical thinking and implies that there is some sort of magical process going on that goes against physics and such.

To those I want to say: Do you not think that the things in our concsiousness are not part of a system with cause and effect as well?

Is it not so that our entire concsiousness creates our percieved reality?

Could it be perhaps that perhaps the fact that you create this personal reality that it has an effect on what you percieve OR even on other percieved realities of other human beings?

If you immediately discard any of what I'm saying then perhaps consider that your perception is heavily biased by what you believe in. Often what you believe in is created by what you've learned is appropriate. Sadly most of you are not able to see themselves as their "greatest authority" and thus are not able to create your own reality.

The last thing I want to say is that consciousness is causing things to manifest themselves in our material universe. I think that is what OP meant by "It's clear to those who own bodies that mind is over matter". It's the reason that Trump won the election for example. So basically, everything that happens has it's root cause in the metaphysical wich itself has it's own processes and every being is part of these processes.

A few things.

I am a firm believer people come to chans through their own effort, and self sort into what interests them. Chasing after other board users is almost a complete waste of time for more niche boards. We need to advertise, but we need to pull from off-chan, outside groups. Drop some flyers around the student union lounge, etc.

We could raid a professional philosophy board. Would not work in practice unless, in addition to the usual starting shit just for the fuck of it, we link the idea of: "show us why philosophy on an image-board and do us some outreach" thing. This might make them willing to stick around.

Change the board to be more inclusive. Umbrella the board with the humanities and sociology, not strictly philosophy.

Find a way to link us up with anime and cartoons.

Philosophy on western image-boards remains focused on politics. For good or for ill, that's what is popular. From the perspective of these users there is no need for more expansive theoreticals.

>Are you autistic?

4U

It's shit because you're still here.

Look at the threads from the early days of the board and you'll see it's simply following the law that things get shittier with time.

>>4724

because the old BO had no interest in stopping shitposting and a holier than thou redditor tripfag chased everyone else away with his shit attitude. i suspect the BO and the tripfag were one and the same.

>>4722

>Comte and Rousseau

Sounds like that one novel Dostoyevsky never got around to writing.

>>4728

Also, despite constantly talking about the difference between collectivism and individualism, Radbruch never tried to take a stand between either in his Introduction to the Jurisprudence. If there's one thing I don't like, it's a philosopher who's afraid of telling me his goddamn opinion.

>>4718

/thread

What makes a good philosopher is genuinely giving more of a shit for truth than social status.

Or: being an ancient Greek, a race that no longer exists. Athens had a population of less than a million and they produced several philosophers. At that rate, the modern West would have entire cities of the things. However, even in Athens, they unfortunately became high status and were diluted to homeopathic levels by the pretenders. As for the West, forget it. Only a few mutants even pretend, and only mutant mutants can do it for real.

no

aren't all geniuses

>>4663

No.

>>4651

Had a few mental issues but he saw the world soundly.

Astute observer of human will and where it leads.

ad...hominem?

"He was right."

>but muh autism.

"So?

"He was wrong."

>but muh no autism.

"Good for him?"

Yes.

Define your terms and you'll immediately realize what you're saying is nonsense.