/lit/ - Literature

twitter philosophy lmao

>>14120205
everyone knows his ethics are garbage

> durr, Kant didn't account for contemporary American notions of a family
> durr, how could we consume more for our kids than other kids
Retarded. Life is ephemeral, and he doesn't even say what conditions notion of the family would be. Perhaps, parents wouldn't raise their own kids and his moralistic state would. I haven't read Kant, but his analysis is far from satisfactory.

>>14120205
Come on now /lit say it with me

>Fuck off Taleb

>>14120263
Taleb should take a picture of you. The anonymity of 4chan is bringing out the asshole in you.

>general above the particular
>the exception disproves the rule

>>14120272
Nobody is comfortable with a camera that they don't own or trust watching them, especially when it's someone as creepy as you Taleb.

>Taleb comes up with a maxim for prioritizing the particular over the universal
>applies it to more things than just Kant (much of his philosophy is like this),
>so he's universalized the maxim by applying it to similar situations
>this is Kantian ethics
>Taleb is basically a Kantian while refuting Kantian ethics
>Taleb refutes himself
Taleb btfo.

>>14120490
Is kant literally irrefutable?

>>14120525
Pretty much all post-Kantian philosophy -- analytic and continental included -- is all Kant cope.

>>14120205
Kant is retarded and autistic. His ethical system is purely aesthetic with no real rational basis.

>>14120205
The Taleb shilling has been getting really annoying.

SHOO SHOO ARAB JEW!

>>14120546
t. John Stuart Mill

>>14120589
better, but also retarded, as maximizing population happiness makes no sense as an end goal. Maximizing my happiness is the end goal. Why should I want otherwise? Though it may be true that fostering healthy populations will be good for the individual. In general, we should be good to others as an indirect way to better ourselves. This shit is easy, give me a challenge

>>14120599
Define 'better'? Whence the criteria to better yourself? There are many such notions, many conflicting. I'd also venture not one of them sui generis in your case. Eating this and that from the buffet of 'better' derived from Millenia of scentless ideology and call that meal a personality, an intelligence? Dispeream ni scis mentula quid sapiat.

>>14120817
We have an innate sense of preference. Some states of experience are simply more pleasant. I cannot explain why, so don’t ask. But this seems common to all, and that’s what we must work with. I can not argue for you, but personally, I like when I feel good, and I know that if I strive to maximize my pleasant experiences, then I will be happy, and this I like. So the only thing that matters to me is pursuing the most preferable experiences in the ways I see fit. That does not mean that I always understand what will truly benefit me: I often do not find the decision that will maximize my pleasantness in life, though sometimes I am relatively close, and other times I might be far away. Life is a big game of chess, and we are not perfect, but we understand the basic principles. Some moves may break our basic understanding but be the objectively correct moves, in the sense that our present opinion does not change the fact that such a move will truly be preferable to us in the end.

>>14120205
quick rundown? who's this arab?

>>14120878
The next Saladin

>>14120205
>hurr durr Kantian Universalism means you must provide for every single child in the world even at the cost of your own
Is this guy retarded?

>>14120272
When I first read your post I thought you meant that Taleb should take a selfie with him. Placing the opposing parties in the same frame as a way to establish contact, as a kind of introductory manners. Sounded neat. But then it turns out that Taleb was acting like a paparazzi and threatening them with implied online abuse (not sure if he's aware of this himself). Kinda strange!

>>14120205
no he's dead bro

>>14120205
so you take care of your kid and the other guy will take care of his kid, etc, et al. Am i retarded or is he joshing around? Please help.

>>14120320
>>14121915
>Taleb the watcher

>>14120855
>Innate sense of preference

Inane sense of inate preference.

>>14120205
How is it inconsistent to act universally such that all could prioritize particulars? The maxim that one ought to be partial to their significant others is not a contradiction.

>>14123201
but why should I do that

>>14123206
You don't need to. But if you/Taleb wanted to come up with a moral law according to Kant's practical form which emphasized particulars, you could.

>>14123218
I don’t see the purpose of such a system. Like >>14120546 said, it just seems empty with no real meaning behind it. How does this relate to ethics? Why should I be concerned with this?

>>14123231
Because we identify things as good in and of themselves. And that means ethics can't hinge on anything material and contingent. Rationality is neither of those things.

>>14123255
>Because we identify things as good in and of themselves
I have no idea what you mean by this or how it relates to Kant’s system

>>14123262
A good will is good in and of itself. That's the premise for his whole argument, you fucking moron.

>>14123275
seems circular and vague. You could just as easily derive utilitarianism as his autistic system

>>14123283
How is that vague? Utilitarianism is entirely contingent upon the circumstances. His goal was to find a form (and thereby, source) of morality that wasn't (because we identify things as good in and of themselves).

>>14120272
Based.

>>14120205
At least he isn't just postulating.

>>14120219
This. Sadly it's all anyone is exposed to as an undergrad.

>>14120272
>STOP BEING ANONYMOUS SO I CAN AVOID YOUR ARGUMENT AND INSULT YOU PERSONALLY

>>14120205
Why is he saying nationalism cause blowups but then he defends it in the next sentences?

>>14120272
I had doubts but now I know beyond any doubt that this arab was bullied in school

>>14123283
fucking cringe dude, just go read the fucking groundwork. in the distant future ill be able to filter people out who don't have memory sectors of their brain that correspond with having read the work being discussed.