[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 268 KB, 1600x2398, 81RvDjI8mYL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19689027 No.19689027 [Reply] [Original]

Moral philosophy is the most midwit branch of philosophy and fittingly it is the most popular branch of philosophy (to the degree that it is almost synonymous with philosophy in average normie brain) and everyone has some moral opinions even when they don't care about more noble and intellectually demanding disciplines like metaphysics and aesthetics.
Average "argument" in a moral "philosophy" paper
>thing X is commonly regarded as good/bad
>other thing Y is actually just like that thing X
>therefore thing Y is also good/bad by the transitive property
This is how most moral "philosophers" argue for animal liberation by comparing it to slavery which is (almost) unanimously condemned. These "philosophers" have learned one simple trick and just reuse it over and over again in different made up settings. The icing on cake is the fact that the first premise of the argument doesn't even call the goodness of X into question - it just assumes that because your average normie thinks X is good then it is good and by extension so is Y. Are there any books (besides pix related) which lay bare the utter retardation of moral "philosophy"?

>> No.19689109

>>19689027
As opposed to aesthetic and metaphysical philosophy which is "I like X" or "X makes sense to me" and "therefore anyone who feels different must just be a worse telepathic prophet than me" and it comes down to a dick sucking screaming match to decide which one is really "right"

All philosophy is retarded anon. It's just a necessary evil to give our legal system any foundation at all but the gov's right to monopolize violence and to give the populace common values to gossip about thus establishing useful social bonds crucial to running a society.

Anon being casually into philosophy is the right way to do philosophy

Throw out all the ancient Greek schizophrenia and redux the modernist shit to "objective reality exists but don't think you're own biases are direct messages from God" which is really all it's good for and what took us thousands of years to reach because philosophers are such useless wankers.

>> No.19689138

>>19689027
The question of what you ought to do, think, be, is the most important question and it precedes all other areas of research because it determines if you should research them at all.

>> No.19690758

Moralists are the most stupid, insufferable, ignorant, clueless, frustrating idiots to walk the face of the planet. And I do not exaggerate here.

>>19689027
Is "The End of Morality" a decent read? Or is it just the most basic form of common-sense directed at braindead dimwits? I'm presuming the latter.

>> No.19690776

philosophy is inseparable from the use of force. it's always about law and what the government can do to you. no one gives a shit about morality divorced from law

the other branches of philosophy are just wannabe science that contribute nothing

>> No.19690934

>>19690758
You're writing style is impetuous. The greatest novelists of western civilization were objective moral realists, wether they behaved morally or not.

>> No.19690955

>>19689027
Cope retard. Your "normies" are into moral philosophy because it is the single branch of philosophy with any useful application in the real world. Please keep wasting your time arguing aesthetics with philosophers (!).

>> No.19690962

>>19690934
>You're writing style is impetuous.
>You're writing style is impetuous.
>You're writing style is impetuous.
AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHHA!!!

>> No.19691014

>>19689027
Metaphysics is supposed to provide an objective basis for ethics.

>> No.19692641

Bump, because I’m reading “The End of Morality” and might give a rundown if I end up finishing it. Which is unlikely, as, so far, it has been utter dogshit.