/lit/ - Literature

>>14683851
papa Heraclitus

Now a different point: arguments centered around examples that are either or not altruistic are pointless.

>>13968648
Take for example self-sacrifice for the sake of others. Using this example to debunk Stirner's theorem of egoism requires you to know that the person in that case indeed valued life above death, but chose death anyway. We cannot crawl into each others existence to see what they valued at that moment, so this argument will get you nowhere.

Arguing in favor as well as against in the above
example is some spooky territory, because talking about the content of another's existence is nonsense either way.

In the end, these arguments are based upon essentialistic, goods; be it will-to-sex, will-to-life, etc. Fact of the matter is: there is just will, and this will is einzig. Will is just simply a given and all the how's and why's are spooks.

>>13346587
Dude, I'm not one of those faggots that keep spouting that "start with the greeks" bullshit. I don't have anything against modernity either, and I'm not into the french pseudery either. I think that philosophy should be enjoyed from literally every age of history. It's just fiction that just can't be surpassed by the olds and they should be standard. There are some newer guys but the bulk of the human thought expressed by fiction you gotta learn is the ancients and that's it.

>>13346598
Made me chuckle. Here, have a (you)

>>12073601
Beautifully put anon, just beautiful...

How should I go about naming my obscurantist literary blog? Any ideas for a good name?

If it weren't for Socrates or maybe even Parmenides, would western philosophy have developed like the east?

Heraclitus' works sounded a bit similar to daoism.