/lit/ - Literature

By the way, why humanists assume being human is a good thing?

>>11371179
because they're human probably

>>11371203
And that implies goodness?

>>11371210
>>11371179
the two fundamental instincts
survive and breed
goodness is the way that leads to the best of these (which is one's own standards, they just happen to coalesce with most people's)

anthrocestrism is the most destructive thing there is
we need to adopt an ecocentric mindset

>>11371210
Imagine being so psychologically cucked you start questioning the legitimacy of your own identity.

>>11371341
I am pure evil, don't know about you though.

>>11371224
Why is it good to follow those instincts?

>>11371305
Ecocentricism is just as silly, other life on earth has no inherent value either. Muh earthlings is just another form of identity politics.

>humanism
We are humans
We behave as humans
Humans like to be violent
WAAHA violence bad!
>t. humanists

WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY

>>11372148
this

>>11372148
Ecocentrism is about more than earth life, it's about paying respect to nature and God. It would be no different in any other world. To divorce yourself entirely of identity is to relinquish everything that makes you worthy.

>>11372148
Ecocentrism at least observes the fact that human beings are part of nature and depend on it. Ethics that take this into account would make for a much more stable society.

>>11372148
>other life on earth has no inherent value either

Well shit man if you deny inherent value then you're really not having the same conversation. Not that denying inherent value is a bad move, necessarily. It's just that in a discussion of candidates for possession of inherent value in the universe it's not exactly helpful to say nothing has inherent value

>>11372848
>>11372148
>>11371305
>>11372712
>>11372787
>falling for the humanism vs post-humanism debate

Its time to take the anti-human pill

>>11372848
>>11372148
>>11371305
>>11372712
>>11372787
>falling for the humanism vs post-humanism debate

Its time to take the anti-human pill

>>11372933

why the fuck did you attach a picture of heidegger here. heidegger is much closer to schelling than anyone else in this discussion. neither were anti-humanists you fucking moron.

>>11372944
Confirmed for having never read Heidegger. Heidegger was not just anti-humanism he was against the very concept of seeing yourself as a human

>>11371495
*SNAP*

>"Man isn't a social animal"
>Doesn't live alone in the woods
Epic

>Humanity is not something to be celebrated, rather, it is something to be overcome
Anne Frank was pretty enlightened

>>11371144
The latter is meaningless, the former is relevant. In discussing the properties and tendencies of an iron pot, would you ignore that it is comprised of iron and is a pot? I mean this from a human perspective, not a non-perspective in which case there is no such thing as a pot and it's hard to ascribe any significant higher properties to it because it is viewed in a purely material sense. No, because that is the entirety of an iron pot, with corresponding properties (like particular ideal range of heat for cooking stew, specific to that pot, defined by its material and human dictation). Humans are not some omniscient immaterial beings, they are animals though with great malleability. To pretend 'man is a social animal' is invalid/wrong, is to pretend 'stabbing myself will make me bleed' is invalid/wrong.

>>11371617
Because you are human, not exempt from the universe. You don't follow those instincts in an intellectual decree, you are those instincts (and more). To deny them is to deny your own mind's mechanics and form. You can deny them from a more objective view, but to ignore the fact that you are not and cannot hold a more objective view is to be delusional. Let's not get into the non-existence of this apparent 'objective view' either. At least in terms of senses, which is the only thing any 'perspective', mind, or creature has.

>>11372148
Unironically based.

>>11372148
fucking based