/lit/ - Literature

>enlightens your btfo

>>19543134
Him and Hume

>>19548071
Her too

>>19359124
>I have read a great a great deal of philosophy but have never encountered an idea so disturbing as consciousness being a mistake, something that should have never been.

Well epiphenomalism is halfway there, whether or not you go on to say that it's a curse depends on how much of a faggot you are. I used to be a pessimist gaylord myself and think that the "well why don't you kys?" arguments against pessimism were ill-founded, but really, they're perfectly fine. If you have decided that consciousness is gay and retarded then you should at least kill yourself if not feel a moral obligation to commit some kind of mass murder. Anything else is cope. If a thing is bad then you stop engaging with it, or get rid of it, or destroy it, simple as.

The only exceptions are people who are simply too scared to kill other people and/or themselves out of fear of possible consequences and the actual violence of dying yourself, but then you're just a coward with consistent beliefs.

How come British philosophy peaked with him and never improved?

A question for anyone who's read Hume's Treatise of Human Nature: are Books 2 and 3 worth reading?

I clearly see the relations to Descartes' rationalism in Book 1, as well as those points which woke Kant from le dogmatic slumber. Do the remaining books have much philosophical merit? Russell said in his History of Western Philosophy that Book 1 contains all that is novel and important in Hume. If that's true, I'm ready to be done with him and move on.

Then you're missing out on like half the greatest thinkers that ever lived. It's trendy today to be some tongue-in-cheek neo-physiognomist and it might even have a grain of truth to it, but overall you will turn out a giant retard if you don't read ugly and fat people. I know there are plenty impressionable young brains on this trash board who will read a handful of meme excerpts and start taking this shit seriously.