/lit/ - Literature

>>6678654
Because we're apes, and historically saying the wrong thing has been enough to kill over.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/106891948/Stephenson-G-R-1967-Cultural-Acquisition-of-a-Specific-Learned-Response-Among-Rhesus-Monkeys-in-Starek-D-Schneider-R-And-Kuhn-H-J-Eds

>>6678654
People have philosophical conversationa like all the time. They just do it allegorically, through symbols instead of "hey if there is a binding force through the universe but it isn't sentient in the way we are is it God?"

People are more interesting than you think, you're just too autistic to notice, sorry.

>>6678654
You do not talk about the sky to an any, only about grains.

>>6678673
No they don't.

>>6678654
It's not always an appropriate time during everyday conversation. I'm usually not in the mood to get philosophically engaged during commute/work/right after work because I'm more interested in finding mindless, fun ways to cope the boring, mundane nature of the quotidian. I'd rather talk about fapping jokes, look at bitches asses, fuckin, make racist jokes with my coworkers. Nigga you don't have a 8-5 otherwise you would understand. OP has no God.

>>6678654
Because they've figured out it's futile and you haven't. They go into the uninterested silence to try and avoid having to chose between hypocrisy and mocking you. And you don't get the hint.

for me it's because i'm embarrassed to engage with some sub-undergrad level of philosophy. i'd rather just read it

>>6678654
Where do I begin? The people all around me actually have morals and believe in the dick in the sky. Hell they can't even respond when I ask them about why they like that shit genre pulp they read once a year. So I just do drugs with them. Win win.

because philosophy is impractical

>>6678673
If people are more interesting than OP thinks, then OP is more interesting than you think. Why assume autism? Chilean smoke signal memes?

Being into philosophy is like being into wheelbarrows or deck chairs.
It's just weird.
I once feigned a six month long interest in general philosophy as part of a performance art project.
People fucking hated it.
People just want to live and then die.
They don't care how or why.

>>6678693
>people discuss philosophy all the time, but it's suvtle and allegorical and if you're not paying attention you'll miss it
>nuh uh

Hey I have a philosophical question why are you so dumb

>>6678742
I-I do Anon.

>>6678736
Didn't say OP wasn't interesting, just unobservant. If he can't have an interesting philosophy conversation using the local memestructure, he's actually autistic

>>6678751
Well then keep doing it.
If you liked tennis you wouldn't expect everyone to find it interesting and important.
People who don't read philosophy live just as long as the rest of us.

>>6678757
Nobody does that though.

>>6678762
>being this wrong
Don't you have to go start a shitpost about how you asked a girl out via text and are baffled as to why she didn't respond

>>6678751
rancid swine

Philosophy doesn't make life more bearable. In fact, it can make you suffer more. Excessive consciousness is 'unnatural' (although I hesitate to use that word). Often, it will paralyze your ability to live, to act, to be a human being, because you get stuck within the strictures of abstract systems of thought. Over-analysis isn't healthy, especially when a lot of it is just meaningless word-games. You begin to question everything, which is a futile, life-emptying enterprise.

>>6678777
Give us an example of an 'allegorical philosophical conversation' you had with someone.

The thing about discussing philosophy is that most people are only fine with sharing their thoughts on serious matters with people they trust and they are only able to discuss a lot of topics when in an appropriate state of mind. You can't just bring up a topic out of the blue and expect a discuss.

Sure there are discussion slus out there who are willing to talk about a lot of things with anyone, but mostly because they like hearing themselves talk.

You could also ask 'Why doesn't Dasein like being uprooted from its readiness-to-hand for the sake of your obsession with presence?' It would be just as pretentious a way of posing your question. Plenty of people just don't enjoy talking about life or thinking about these things.

I usually walk up to my coworkers and say, "Read that latest Hegel number? heh heh!" and we all discuss its merits. Everybody goes home content and full of wisdom. What's wrong with your environment OP?

>>6678799
>Hawks and doves as the breakup of punk bands

I'm lucky enough to be able to talk to one of my closest friends about philosophy pretty often. Neither of us are very learned in the field thou, so most of you anons would probably say our conversations are pleb tier and pseudo philosophical at best. I think it's great though.

We also both realize that no one else we know is really into depth in conversation, but that's OK because it doesn't really matter in the long run.

>>6678796

I think I have actually made myself crazy from this kind of over-analysis.

I'm being eaten alive by my own cynicism, it has killed all motivation and passion in me, and I spend every day sleeping, smoking and waiting for death as unopened letters pile up.

I have unplugged my answering machine and no longer respond to email.

I am not ready to die, but that was never a relevant criteria.

>>6678799
Not the guy you're responding to, but I'll be that guy trying to make other snoody people bear pop music and shit like that in a subverted attempt at becoming one with the Dao.

>>6678751
No you don't. Don't pretend that's not a shitload of genre fiction behind you.

>>6678796
But what about Stoic Philosophy?

>>6679281
>Unopened letters.
>Unplugged answering machine.

Huh?

>>6679784
Stoic philosophy is a contradiction itself in human nature. It relies entirely on "rationalizing" human nature and constraining it. That shit leads to cancer.

>>6679779
I'm just keeping it for a friend, okay.

>>6679784
Holy shit.

In the last few months I've been happier than ever before, truly happy for the first time in memory in conscious memory. This is partly because I was coming up with my own philosophy about the universe and how to live a virtuous life, as a personal coping mechanism and to give life some sort of meaning/purpose. Now, because of your post, I was implored to look up Stoic philosophy and read the wikipedia article. My god, it is precisely the philosophy that I have been developing in my head for the last few months, everything from the stoic lifestyle that I've been practising, to the theories of the universe and natural fate. This is absolutely incredible. It's mind blowing that these ancient philosophers were having the exact same thoughts as me. The wikipedia article alone has helped me clear up some of the ideas I wasn't sure about. It's as if I was on right on the verge of some of the ideas that they had finalised, such as that of the relation of the mind and the universe, and the actual reason for holding certain virtues. Thank you so much for your post. I feel so fulfilled.

>>6678796
To you I will say that Stoic philosophy absolutely makes life more bearable. My own rough version of it has cured me of what I thought was lifelong depression, at least for now. It is essentially a counter to Nihilism that will help you live in bliss, no matter the circumstances.

>>6678796
You're equating philosophy with anxiety. Plenty of philosophers advocate stepping back from that kind of obsessive analysis.

>>6678694
This explains it. Someone post the Nietzsche quote about how hasty modern life is and how people have lost all sense of decorum and leisure.

This problem you have corresponds with a general degeneration in people's conception of life. Liberalism / multiculturalism / moral relativism eventually does away with even the idea of objective truth, and once the idea of Truth is done away with people aren't going to be bothered to look for it.

>>6680328
>problem
How is problematic that people don't care about obscure topics that have nothing to do with their lives and interests? Not to mention that plebs didn't care about philosophy before 'liberal multiculturalism' any more than they do now.

>>6678654
Scientism and poor verbal and visual language comprehension.

In the 12th grade, we were expected to narrate an essay that we wrote for yet another tedious IB assignment, my use of language was labeled 'archaic' for not being transparent,

>>6680337
>How is problematic that people don't care about obscure topics that have nothing to do with their lives and interests?

But they do care about those things, see celebrity gossip

Save that shit for when everyone's really baked. Nobody wants to talk about philosophy sober; everyone comes out of it sounding stupid and ignorant.

>>6680345
Those things are entertainment, though. Philosophy isn't, not in the same way. You understand that marketing, capitalism, and the stupidity of the masses exist, right? You really can't fault people for not caring about what dead white people said about things that don't interest you or entertain you or have any obvious practical application.

>>6679784
>>6680219

Yeah. I should clarify that I wasn't attacking all philosophy. I actually like Stoicism.

>>6680379
>like
>being emotionally attached to school of thoughts

this isn't pokemon you fucking uneducated swine

>>6680382

You're an idiot.

>>6680379

Cue teenage snort of the fucking faggot who thinks philosophy theses are to be favorited or disliked.

Throw yourself under a train so that you can't be any further embarassment to your poor parents.

>>6678654
Philosophical conversations come with the twin turn-offs of having to actually think before speaking, and about worrying if you have the linguistic capability to communicate what you conceptualize in such a way that another mind can successfully interpret it and fully comprehend where you're coming from. Typically leads to headaches and frustration that stymies intellectual conversation.

>>6680405
Why mustn't one find comfort in a certain philosophy, not as a study, but as applied to one's own life?

>>6680444
While philosophy is an end in itself, this end in itself is not happiness through practical application but the quest for knowledge.

Comfort is contingent, and philosophy surely isn't feel-good bullshit.

You would be aware of this if you had read Aristotle.

Nicomacean ethics 16.4 Bodeus

>>6680438
yup
also having the ability to detect bullshit
it's tiring

>>6678654
IRL conversation is of such low quality it really does amaze me. People talk about sports and celebrities, but not even in new or interesting ways, they just say the same old shit. Half of the shit people say IRL doesn't need to be said, yet people go through the motions of saying them.

>>6678654
https://youtu.be/CMRM_bfCBig
Do you even Žižek?

>>6680466
worry not
as they grow older together people switch to a higher level of communication

>>6680328
The fuck does objective truth or multi-culti have to do with anything. What your complaining about is nihilism.

>>6680473
Don't be so sure. Some never get any better or they get better at communication but not enough.

>>6680481
we have no better choice than avoid them then

>>6680473
Most of the people in my office are older (30s-40s). I don't think age has much to do with it. However, I have noticed that older people in positions of power usually have more interesting conversation. I guess that's not surprising.

>>6680473
This is idealistic and absolutely not true. What actually happens is that people get worse at communicating because they don't feel the need to prove themselves anymore.

>>6680497
defeated answer from someone who's probably only in his mid twenties

please notice I said "older together" and not just "older"

if you still talk with 10+ years friends you have no friends

at this point you're supposed to have told them everything

>>6678673
This post is false. It's based on the fantasies of a self-hating autist who thinks that the average person is a 150IQ intellectual masterman.

>>6680509
God, you're annoying. You aren't "supposed to have" done anything, you fucking Hallmark card faggot. And most people who have known each other for a long time don't need to speak as much, because they've experienced so much together.

>>6680509
I see what you mean. At the same time, I don't think the "higher form" of communication you're talking about necessarily correlates to the profound type of philosophical conversation mentioned in the OP. Just because two lovers can communicate effectively with fewer words or gestures doesn't mean they're talking about anything important.

>>6680526
see, you agree with me but felt the need to add a few insults
you'll grow out of it
rhetoric is worthless

>>6680516
Wrong. His fantasy is that it doesn't matter if the average person has a high IQ. The average person is still smart and interesting, we just need to speak his language.

Again, that's the anon's fantasy. Not my opinion.

>>6678694
No, the real issue is that you're probably retarded. If you had an serious job, you'd probably refrain from staring at girls' asses and making sexual jokes since one chick overhearing you and getting mad will result in you getting booted the fuck out. So my conclusion is that you talk about jacking off with your friends at your job as a Pizza Hut manager or something on that level.

>>6680534
IQ =/= intelligence
intelligence =/= interest
Talk to more people.

>>6680538
le reddit worldview haver

>>6680538
I made no statements about anything other than the anon's fantasy.

>>6680554
worthless rhetoric
>>6680555
not accusing you of anything
trips witnessed

le aggressively self-effacing 125iq new sincerity man has come to convert us from misanthropy

>>6679793
I have become Nihilo-Neet

I have no values and everything smells like horseshit.

It's a pretty garbage-tier way to live, but I can't let go of how awful, shit and wrong everybody and everything is.

>>6680564

>>6678654

Weird you say that, for me it's been the complete opposite ever since I got into uni. People seem to actually care for other opinions, they inquire. Every now and then a girl (there's no boy in my field) comes up to me and asks me for a word of advice in a really honest manner, this hasn't really happened to me before at all. I can start a debate on principles without anyone rolling his eyes. It's neat.

>>6678673

I see this, too. Lately I've been paying more attention and it really doesn't matter at all how educated someone is, you can always take something away from a conversation.

>>6680562
Cmon anon, answer my post. >>6680530

I know it's you because you're the only one here typing in all lower-case and repeating the word "rhetoric."

>>6678799

Ideology is everywhere friend. So are morals and ethics. People don't really know they're making statements, but they are. You just need to dissect them to get to the bottom. Not the guy you responded to, by the way.

If you really want to talk about philosophy, you can. You just have to phrase it in terms that the dummies around you will understand.

Me personally, I find it unfulfilling. Yeah, you might get some good conversation out of it, but I'm tired of conversation. I want to actually do something.

>>6680581
sorry man just didn't see
it is true that more efficient communication doesn't mean richer communication, but the thing is that if two persons can easily brush off the scoria of the conversation, then most of their chit chat will be revolving around different themes

it eventually comes to the point where you only talk for important, deep things

>>6680337

Exactly

>>6680589
>Ideology is everywhere friend. So are morals and ethics. People don't really know they're making statements, but they are.

But what if the moral or ethical statements they're making are inconsistent or incommensurate?

Sure, people say things which sound like ethical or moral statements, but often those statements aren't grounded in anything and are just said to give a certain impression of themselves.

>>6680600
do you think people are this intellectually dishonest when they have little reason to do so and will receive very little gratification from it ?

this isn't a rhetorical question

>>6680509

I have a lot of friends that I've known for more than ten years and we still have plenty to discuss. Several lifetimes to discuss. Why are you so frustrated?

>>6680613
frustrated ? what do you mean ?

>>6680605
I don't think it's intellectual dishonesty so much as thoughtless nihilism. The foundation is "nothing matters, so we can say anything."

>>6680617
eh makes sense

>>6680509
If nothing new happens in your life or in your mind over the course of 10 years then you are not worthy of friends.

>>6680624
this is absolutely correct but discussing events is an entirely different thing from discussing each other, wich is what friends do

>>6680568
that's u

>>6680600
No moral statements are grounded in anything when you look closely enough.

An elaborate system of normative ethics is ultimately no less arbitrary than whatever the average pleb spouts at the top of his lungs.

>>6680600

>But what if the moral or ethical statements they're making are inconsistent or incommensurate?

Sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't. Its upon you to find out why they are or aren't.

This is more about mentality to be honest. If you are willing to take away something from a conversation you always will. Think about why people will cling on to things that you consider objectively wrong, try to understand them and, as a solution, apply everything to yourself to not fall into the same traps they fell into. We're not as smart as we like to think, so I try to find my own flaws in other people, too.

>>6680630
eh my boobs aren't that big anon

>>6680632
but that isn't true, you are completely ignoring moral realism here.

a lot of people are moral realists, including but not limited to believers

>>6680616

I was referring to your statement:

>if you still talk with 10+ years friends you have no friends

>at this point you're supposed to have told them everything

These are bland generalizations in my opinion. My friend read, they actively look out for new music, films, art, entertainment. They lead (at least sort of) interesting lives and usually have a few great stories to share every time we meet. Humans develop, we never stop developing. So there's always something to talk about. What would Chipotle think about your statement? To be honest, I'd say I only have a handful of true friends. Those are golden. Many of those I've known since early childhood.

>>6680632

I sort of agree with this, too. Morals and ethics are by definition arbitrary, that doesn't mean they don't serve a purpose/ don't deserve to be analyzed, even if you disagree.

>>6678759

>If you liked tennis you wouldn't expect everyone to find it interesting and important.

>>6680632
>No moral statements are grounded in anything when you look closely enough.

But what about moral statements grounded in religion?

>An elaborate system of normative ethics is ultimately no less arbitrary

If it's "elaborate" and/or based on axioms of some sort, how is it not less arbitrary than just random ethical statements which have no connection to one another?

>>6680652
>Morals and ethics are by definition arbitrary

Yeah, but you guys introduced the word "arbitrary." My argument is that their statements may be incommensurate, which has more to do with consistency than it does with whether or not it's arbitrary.

>>6680652
I see. my point is that friends communicate way faster than they change or that shit happens in their lives, so fast that their extreme empathy makes up for everything

so you eventually run out of material. plus events are not the greatest theme in a discussion

this is ofc my own opinion based on experience and culture

>>6680666

>Yeah, but you guys introduced the word "arbitrary."

Whether or not morals and ethics are arbitrary does not really matter at all. You are correct. Nice devil trips, too.

>>6678654
Most people think in concrete terms and the here and now. I can definitely relate to your experience. When I start talking about abstract ideas or anything avant garde most people freeze up and can't respond.

>>6680673

I see. I purposefully shelter myself sometimes, just to get some distance since I'm always around people. I moved out of my small city in southern Germany and now live in eastern Ger, so I only get to see my homeboys every few weeks.

I agree that recent events are nothing extraordinary to talk about, yet I always seem to find something that mystifies me. Luckily my friends have a decent interest in philosophy, too, so I get some discussion from time to time.

I feel like some people barely change in decades, but a lot of my old friends tell me I'm a completely different person compared to a few years ago. This happens to me every few years. Some mean this negatively, some positively. Some older friends I feel really disconnected to now.

I still think that you never actually reach a point where you don't have anything to converse about. My girlfriend and me talk on the phone every single day, sometimes for one or two hours. Often times there are no recent events to talk about, so we just end up discussing. It really blows my mind that after almost two years she still manages to completely catch me offguard, make me question myself and manages to give me a new perspective on a lot of things.

>>6678654
you can thank women in the workforce for the general degradation of conversation

>>6680692
To add, people also freeze up when I speak in allegories or in symbolic ways.

>>6680699

and here comes the obligatory /r9k/ frustrated virgin downfall of society shitpost trying to start some shitflinging in a decent thread.

kill yourself. pretty please. make this board a better place.

>>6680700
>To add, people also freeze up when I speak in allegories or in symbolic ways.

>>6680693
> I purposefully shelter myself sometimes, just to get some distance since I'm always around people

I also think that distancing yourself from your entourage favorises getting close to them. It gives more value to the relationship by making it rare and precious.

That's why I never text back :^)
But I see what you and >>6680673 mean.

>>6680708
yeah, rather than consider the weight of what i said you'd rather shy away from the truth and fling a bunch of catchphrases at me

>>6680382
>>6680405

Obviously, I meant that I think it has merit in the sense that it's useful—that is has practical value. It can be applied to one's life in a way that affects one's behavior and overall lifestyle (for the better, as I see it). That's open to debate, of course. But I didn't mean 'like' in some watered down juvenile sense. But then, both of you knew that, and wanted to be malicious anyway.

>>6680710
I'm not constantly talking like that.

>>6680649
The only thing I'm ignoring is the claim by moral realists that they are right. Their morals are founded on nothing just like the rest.

>>6680660
>But what about moral statements grounded in religion?
See above.

>>6680666
All moral systems start with certain assumptions that are accepted arbitrarily.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsqA-B9XX-4 smart people conversations are like this. smooth and relaxed in tone but syncopated and with cool quartal harmonies and some mexican guy making drum faces

meanwhile normal person conversations are like htat song where wiz khalifa raps about losing his virginity, ie retarded and listening to them makes you feel embarrassed

>>6680716
I didn't know, I'm just in a bad mood
Sorry for being rude

>>6678796
The key is having a detached, distant perspective, not an analytical one.

>>6680719
too lazy to get into this debate right now tbh

here is an interesting paper if anyone feels interested though

http://www.iep.utm.edu/moral-re/#H4

>>6680328
>talking about Nietzsche and objective truth in the same thought

>>6678796
>Often, it will paralyze your ability to live, to act, to be a human being, because you get stuck within the strictures of abstract systems of thought. Over-analysis isn't healthy, especially when a lot of it is just meaningless word-games. You begin to question everything, which is a futile, life-emptying enterprise.
And this is a conclusion you came to through thought and analysis. If you were a little dumber, you'd have been trapped in where you were prior.

>>6680715

>yeah, rather than consider the weight of what i said

At the bottom of your "opinion" is that women are inherently worse at conversing when it comes to abstract topics, which I oppose. That is why I will bombard you with insults until you leave. Do you understand now?

>>6680449

>this end in itself is not happiness through practical application

Actually, it is. The means to happiness is the pursuit of virtue and the acquisition of knowledge—self-knowledge—in accordance with reason. The goal is very much happiness, even if the steps toward it are laborious or demanding. So you're completely wrong.

>>6680712

>I also think that distancing yourself from your entourage favorises getting close to them. It gives more value to the relationship by making it rare and precious.

>That's why I never text back :^)

I'm the same, sometimes I take one or two months to write back in social media and then reply with a lengthy paragraph. It has the feeling of exchanging letters, I love it. Saves conversations from becoming too casual and samey, too.

>>6680741
no, at the bottom of what i said is an uncomfortable truth about the nature of sexuality in the workplace. think of how many standards of conduct have been introduced since women have been working with men. you don't think that affects conversation? think about the symbolic nihilism that drives most advertising doublespeak...you do realize that kind of langauge was invented because it works with women, right?

i also don't think the problem of femininity is "inherent" to women, it's both historically and biologically constructed. women have potential to be better, but pretending they aren't complete low quality conversationalists and thinkers is just lying to yourself for comfort.

>>6680736

'Over-analysis' is the key word here. But it's okay, you tried.

>>6680763
>But it's okay, you tried.

Not that guy, but I bet you're a real drag to be around. What a condescending douche.

This thread is John Green approved

>>6680773

>I bet you're a real drag to be around.
>What a condescending douche.

This response sure does demonstrate your superiority on the issue of condescension.

>>6680779
go get some cranberry juice and tampons for you are period haghahgagaha

>>6680782

What? He's the one that's mad.

>>6680761

>women have potential to be better, but pretending they aren't complete low quality conversationalists and thinkers is just lying to yourself for comfort.

I'm >>6680573 by the way, I'll stop replying now since I have to work in a few hours.

Have a good day/night and maybe rethink those hot opinions you have accepted as an objective truth. Being too full of oneself is never a good thing, what would Socrates say?

I would actually go ahead and say the opposite is true. You seem pretty fucking full of yourself, friend.

>you either accept these opinions I have developed or you're clearly lying to yourself

I have great conversations with women all the time, there is barely any tension. A lot of males feel pressured when talking to women, especially when they're the only male and it's a group, but I have pretty much abandoned this "being uncomfortable". I generally have an easier time connecting with women than I have with men, I also completely oppose the notion that their conversations are more shallow, quite the opposite actually.

I'm

>>6680788
>I'm
a faggot

>>6680573
>ever since I got into uni.

that's why. of course a place dedicated to learning and expanding your mind will have that. in the real world hardly anybody cares about anything beyond their immediate comforts

Know the place and time, you cant just impose people your conversation

You can be philosophical all you want, with the right people.

>>6678654
Well first of all, they might not have that much knowledge and interest about it.

I think this is the biggest reason tbh.

Other than that, maybe they don't find it useful. Most people just want to do things that are useful/fun/moneymaking most of the time.

>>6678751
>Implying all book-tubers (even Reagan) don't read anything besides YA kiddie bullshit.

>>6680747
nope
get a formal training in philosophy please
this is a naive freshman worldview
look up misology

>>6678654
>be sitting on a table at McDonalds with my wife and kids
>having a good time, finally able to relax after a long week of work
>suddenly, a 5'2" balding man in his early thirties,wearing nothing but sweatpants with visible stains and a dirty white shirt, approaches us
>he starts rambling about some guy called Max Stirner, about how everything is a "spook" and that we are his property
>I tell him to fuck off
>He is visibly shaken, starts having a seizure and begins to shit uncontrollably
>Someone calls an ambulance, while the man keeps on rambling about will to power and how we are dominated by slave morality, choking on white foam coming out of his mouth
>The ambulance picks him up, and he leaves a trail of blood and feces leaking from his underwear, still going on about how nobody understands Nietzche and he is intellectually superior than everybody
>mfw they evacuate the restaurant to clean up the stinking mixture of shit and blood
>mfw everybody doesnt even know what the hell happened
>mfw I forgot my happy meal

>>6682440
Icycalm?

>>6680628
questionable. You should make better friends

>>6680788
>>6680800
accurate

>>6678654
I find any serious discussion to be worthless without having something like the internet/books/papers on the subject around, it's just two people vomiting knowledge, even if they memorized every single aspect of the subject in the end it will always result in someone doubting the information anyway and having to take a pause to get acquainted with it or worse, you find someone who has no idea/shallow knowledge about the subject.

Also >>6678881

>>6679274
Are you me?

Are philosophical discussions better in person, or does it not matter as long as both express views concisely?

>>6680347
>baked
Everyone comes out sounding even more stupid and ignorant than sober, you just don't have the mental capacity to realize it at the moment.

I'm into pragmatic philosophy that I can apply to the real world
My most recent writing, titled 'give and take' in my notes, is on getting the most out of social situations, exclusively in the context of giving and taking

People are too accustomed to how they live. On the rare occasion they do feel like talking about it, they try to make it a one way conversation and are unwilling to take in new perspectives
And this applies online as well, but if there's any exceptions out there I'd be interested in opening a conversation

I genuinely want to live consciously and therefore differently than most people

>>6684606
Has your writing been posted online so as to be read by one such as me?

I have a friend who goes up to random people at parties and asks, "Do you believe in God?" then proceeds to systematically dismantle every "argument" they give. That's how you use philosophy in daily life.

>>6684623
You honestly probably wouldn't like it, it never gets out of the rough draft phase

>>6685934
different anon, post it anyway

>>6684623
Here's some
>>6684909

>>6684763
I'll bet that man wears a certain kind of old fashioned headwear which he proceeds to tip when he is done with his argument