/philosophy/ - Philosophy

Rules:

1. Respect the Global Rules.

2. Moderation will be kept to a minimum.

3. No spamming.

4. Spoiler NSFW images.

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

Regarding the missing board banners, this appears to be a site-wide issue. I will attempt a restore after this is fixed.

Regarding the associated boards list, December 2 was announced as the final date for board migration requests. Based off of Ron's current estimates, sometime between December 9 through 16 it should be clear if any of these boards (besides /lit/) will be returning. Replacing links to non-extant boards is something we need to philosophize on a bit.

This thread is for Philosophy about esoteric physics. Debunking climate science, and other fun stuff

What does philosophy think of these guys?

Before 1997, there were dominance hierarchies and cliques as always (jocks, nerds, geeks etc). Non-partnered people self-described as "single".

In 1997, Alana invented the self-victimizing term "incel" and ran a forum for 3 years before moving on. This was the first "incel" community.

- Incel is short for "involuntary celibate"

- It's "involuntary" so the reasons are extrinsic

- It's a definition and a description of a perceived state

It's 2025 today

- There are many different "incel" forums

- "Incels" believe in a concept of "inceldom"

- "Incels" critique (critical theory) the world news and history

- "Incels" use "incel" to understand the world better

So there are two meanings to the word now:

- Alana's definition, "everyone who has been single for a while is an incel"

- Practical definition, "incels" are people who use the term "incel" to analyse and understand the world through a perceived state of involuntary celibacy

The second definition makes the most sense to adopt because Alana's definition is too broad and includes people who are unaware or either just do not self-identify with the idea/concept. Adopting Alana's definition and using it makes some one an "incel".

Philographics for those

Refer

<tinyboard flag alt></tinyboard>

Is it ok to kill people?

Not as a man but as a philosopher, because there's obviously a glaring downside to his nature.

>b-b-b-b-b-but b-b-b-b-bombs

We all know what he did and it is besides the point of this thread so let's keep the criticisms original.

as far as my flag, I'm not an orthodox existentialist but it was the closest thing to my philosophy.

Lay it on me

Attention! ¡Atención! 注意! ध्यान!! Внимание Atenção! Achtung! 注意! 주의! Attenzione! Let op! Dikkat! Uwaga! Προσοχή! Pozor Observera! ระวัง!

METAmeta philosophy:

[METAXNOSIS] - [the neverending ongoing process of renewing and reinventing the "god(0)-self(1)-reality(3-6-9)" relationship for the purpose of gaining knowledge, experience and spiritual evolution and also just for fun.]

METAmetametametametameta…

X_264

0-1-3-6-9-0-9-6-3-1-0

>>>CHANCHAN.NET

X_264_X_264_X_264_X_264

963101369

<<<

The definition of "metameta" stems from a logical extension of the concept of "meta." If "meta" refers to reflection on a higher level of abstraction concerning a system, structure, or narrative, then "metameta" signifies reflection on the reflection itself—a yet higher level that pertains to meta-structures or meta-narratives.

Definition of "metameta":

Metameta refers to a level of abstraction that analyzes or describes the structure, properties, or narratives of the meta-level. It is second-order reflection about how meta-concepts or meta-narratives are created or used.

Example in art and philosophy:

When we create a meta-narrative (a narrative about a narrative) and within it arises another meta-narrative, we encounter a hierarchy of abstraction. Each subsequent level relates to the one below and can lead to potentially infinite analysis of the analysis itself.

What happens in this situation?

Increased complexity – With each subsequent level, a more intricate system emerges, requiring new tools for interpretation and underPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Heidegger's urhandlung des daseins is the same like activating the default mode network aka daydream mode. Your thoughts?

where I am 100% totalitarian collectivism (communism):

banking (except for abolition of private funds and enactment of wealth redist, basically just end the fed)

infrastructure

buses, ships, trains, and planes, no fares, tax-funded

utilities (including internet, as well as water, heating, and power)

architecture

emergency services (more than just firefighters, all-purpose disaster response workers)

healthcare (including mental and dental)

law enforcement (with emphasis on privacy and individual rights of the citizens)

courts (all prosecutors and defenders public)

prisons (replaced with criminal rehab centers, criminal activity treated as result of mental problems, release only when assigned psych deems unlikely to commit offenses again)

education (at all levels, from preschool to tertiary ed, no private, home, or employer-run schools)

+

all incomes of every worker in a workplace required to listed in every other worker's paycheck, in order from most earned to least, so they may compare wages top those of co-workers. (ex. if one works in a McDonald's you will get the amount paid to every other worker in that specific McDonald's restaurant listed on your paycheck, but not those from any other restaurant in the chain. you won't get your CEO's check unless you work in the same building.)

maternity leave with equal-length paternity leave, and given to every new parent in homosexual or polygamous families.

permanent welfare should be given to those unable to work, and temporary welfare to those able to work, but unemployed.

Since I try to see many kinds of political views and try to see if they truly hold water, I had seen many white nationalist literature over the years.

I may just be me, but they all seem to categorize all white people (besides a few ethnicities of course) as being oppressed by the powers that be, and that the reasons why they themselves aren't going places in life is due to either be the fault of races who are more successful than them (jews and asians), or that the ways of wealth making corrupted the ones who have blood relations with them, and caused them to cast away all obligations of helping their fellow man.

Honestly, they act and whine just as much as the marxist socialists who would contemplate about trying to fuck with people only because of them having a work ethic, or complain about not receiving a higher wage but would not put in work to actually try to get it.

The way the dog was covering the little girl is so cute

WHY ASK

What is ordinary for the dog?

If not in its purpose what is its purpose?

THE WAY: INDICATES A QUESTION

HUMAN NATURE: YOU QUESTION WHAT IS OUT OF THE ORDINARY WHY? THE DESIRE TO BE IN OUR PURPOSE.

ASK: DESIRE TO BE IN OUR PURPOSE

WHAT IS ORDINARY?

THE DESIRE TO BE IN OUR PURPOSE

IS ORDINARY.

YOUR PURPOSE: BE ORDINARY.

WHY DO WE DESIRE OUR PURPOSE: WANT TO BE A PART OF SOMETHING

FAMILY LOVE GOD.

WHY DO WE WANT FAMILY: FEEL THE LOVE OF GOD.

WE ALL WANT TO FEEL THE LOVE OF GOD AND THAT IS ORDINARY.

THAT IS THE POINT.

YOUR PURPOSE IS TO FEEL THE LOVE OF GOD.

THE WORD ALLOWS YOU TO FEEL THE LOVE OF GOD.

FOLLOW IT.

WE NEED TO BE IN ORDER.

CORE DESIRE: RETURN TO ORDINARY.

RETURN TO GOD.

GOD IS ORDINARY.

WE ARE IMAGES OF HIM.

THE DESIRE TO RETURN TO GOD

IS WHY WE WANT ORDINARY

SOMETHING TO RETURN TO BECUASE WE ARE A PART OF THE PUZZLE OF LIFE.

WE ARE A PART.

AND GOD IS LIFE.

WE MAKE-UP GOD AND GOD MAKES US.

COMPLETING HIMSELF.

FAMILY.

COMPLETING FAMILY IS HIS PURPOSE.

MAKE WHOLE.

HES MAKING HIMSELF WHOLE AGAIN.

HES BEEN BROKEN APART.

HES HEALING.

COME BACK TO HIM.

YOU ARE HIS LIGHT.

TO IDOLIZE ANYONE OTHER THAN GOD IS TO ACCPET SIN.

BETTER NO GOOD THEN EVIL.

EVERYONES A SINNER.

Fight the Jew. Learn history. Gain knowledge. Gain power.

Forum sector88.net

Main site sinistar7.org

Jews must pay

Lemme know what you think (Machiavelli was missing and would be God tier)

Why is nietzcheanism considered as a form of socialism in the protocols of the elders of zion.

What are the similarities between them? As far as I can tell they criticise what it means to think and how we form our thought processes in life based on our experiences and sensations but there has to be other connections or maybe i'm inferring incorrectly?