Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2017/01/28: An issue regarding the front page of /jp/ has been fixed. Also, thanks to all who contacted us about sponsorship.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 59 KB, 800x607, 16112.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12388229 No.12388229 [Reply] [Original]

All philosophy taught me is doubting everyone and everything, thereby making me ultimately even more confused than from before I studied philosophy. Is there a way out of the brainlet loop?

>> No.12388237

The critique of pure reason

>> No.12388242

I studied philosophy too, all that makes you believe you can't trust anything is yourself. Stop being a retard, come to the real world.

>> No.12388260

>>12388229
Spirituality, anon. Look into Advaita and Buddhism and learn of your true nature.

>> No.12388273

>>12388260
To add, are you so silly that you do not realize you are the whole world, anon? How silly you are.

>> No.12388274
File: 125 KB, 793x776, Taleb_mug.JPG.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12388274

>>12388229
taleb: Antifragile

>> No.12388286

>>12388229
Be like Leibniz. Agree with EVERYTHING you read and accept all of the consequences, even the ones not addressed by the author. Sometime ahead, if the conclusions are unreasonable, it will be pretty evident.

>> No.12388303

>>12388229
Philosophy to doubt, Science to confirm.
So i suggest science.

>> No.12388320

>>12388303
>science
>confirming anything
???

>> No.12388326
File: 92 KB, 581x767, 1541677991075.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12388326

>>12388303
>Science to confirm
lolwhat? karl popper wants a word with you.
scientific method is based around central idea of falsification - a million wonderful and smart proofs cannot prove a theory. But one experiment can disprove it.

>> No.12388717

>>12388229
Islam is the key.

>> No.12388727
File: 80 KB, 780x631, platonic-solids-2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12388727

Plato predicted this

>But at this point, judging from present experience, there is a danger that dialectic may be the source of many evils. The danger may be illustrated by a parallel case:—Imagine a person who has been brought up in wealth and luxury amid a crowd of flatterers, and who is suddenly informed that he is a supposititious son. He has hitherto honoured his reputed parents and disregarded the flatterers, and now he does the reverse. This is just what happens with a man's principles. There are certain doctrines which he learnt at home and which exercised a parental authority over him. Presently he finds that imputations are cast upon them; a troublesome querist comes and asks, 'What is the just and good?' or proves that virtue is vice and vice virtue, and his mind becomes unsettled, and he ceases to love, honour, and obey them as he has hitherto done. He is seduced into the life of pleasure, and becomes a lawless person and a rogue. The case of such speculators is very pitiable, and, in order that our thirty years' old pupils may not require this pity, let us take every possible care that young persons do not study philosophy too early. For a young man is a sort of puppy who only plays with an argument; and is reasoned into and out of his opinions every day; he soon begins to believe nothing, and brings himself and philosophy into discredit.

>> No.12388735
File: 111 KB, 1510x2200, 001_32StThomasAquin.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12388735

>>12388229
>Is there a way out of the brainlet loop

>> No.12388737

>>12388303
Absolute brainlet
>>12388229
I don’t think you understand anon, there is no way out of the brainlet loop. Any facade of understanding is a construction of consciousness. The only reality is that reality as we understand it is no more real or fake than illusion as we understand it.

>> No.12388745

By reading Wittgenstein and realising that all philosophical problems are lingustic confusion.

>> No.12388788

>>12388229
Alright anon, your thread has gained momentum, and you're being proselytized from every side. I will just tell you not to take on dogma, and to learn of the nature of your soul, which I told you earlier is in reality the whole of reality. Do you understand? The choice is yours - join another club, or uncover the reality's curtain from your eyes.

>> No.12388798

>>12388745
>psst, hey kid
>yeah?
>"beauty" is merely a term we trade, in these convulated games we play, games of language my little tot
>huh? but it obviously refers to something, we're not just using the term for no reason, and the manner of our usage again is not without specific cause
>meaning is use, kid
>what? but the essence of the referent precedes and dictates the use of its sign, else why would the word even be used as such?
>...
>...
>...
>what the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in Engineering, and I've been involved in numerous secret beatings on little children, and I have over 300 confirmed cases of child-abuse. I am trained in hot-poker warfare and...

*also slaps you into unconsciousness*

>> No.12388808

>>12388798
This but unironically

>> No.12388860

>>12388229
To understand that you are a brainlet makes you a non-brainlet already, anon

>> No.12388915

>>12388229
> Is there a way out of the brainlet loop?

Find a material problem that either affects you personally or is affecting your community and find a Practical Solution to that problem.
Be it Pollution, Crime, Bad Education whatever.

SOLVE PRACTICAL PROBLEMS, because philosophy is useless if it's never put to practical use.

>> No.12388919
File: 45 KB, 338x450, 9780812997699.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12388919

>>12388860
no, that is the first step. Second step is learn how to survive, even prosper with it:>>12388274

>> No.12388922

>>12388229
I recommend less "What is?" and more "What good could I try?"

>> No.12388939

>>12388727
How was Plato so fucking based.

>For a young man is a sort of puppy who only plays with an argument; and is reasoned into and out of his opinions every day; he soon begins to believe nothing, and brings himself and philosophy into discredit.

>> No.12388941

>>12388229
>doubting everyone and everything

The point is not to doubt everyone and everything, but to have a reasonable threshold of doubt and think critically. What you are left with is a "fuzzy" kind of truth. Nevertheless these fuzzy truths must solidify to become axiomatic when real decision-making presents itself.

>> No.12388957

>>12388727
how does he do it?

>> No.12388976

>>12388229
You've discovered 'philosophy,' and have wrapped yourself in the neurosis of your own being. Congratulations, you are on the path to enlightenment. Don't think, act.

>> No.12388985
File: 163 KB, 512x512, 1535622580423.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12388985

>>12388939
BASED

>> No.12389005

>>12388727
Plato's eloquence and depth is simply unmatched.

>> No.12389057

>>12388274
>>12388919
Why are you shilling this Phoenician's book?

>> No.12389104

>>12389057
because he is right

>> No.12389337
File: 29 KB, 512x422, 1544038427724.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12389337

>>12389057

>> No.12389869

>>12388717
Unironically based. This is your answer, OP.

>> No.12390351

>>12389869
Nice try, Ali. We both know Buddhism is what he needs.

>> No.12392387

>>12388237
Unironically this

>> No.12392399
File: 14 KB, 291x343, 1546281354543.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12392399

>>12388229
I have this problem too. I can't stop doubting everything and it's making me mentally ill. I had a nervous breakdown at a cafe because of it.

>> No.12392563

>>12388229
Study mathematics and physics, you'll soon be cured of your retardation.

>> No.12392570

>>12392399
The best solution is simply to stop reading philosophy. I hade the same problem, but then I just stopped, and It has improved my mental health

>> No.12392600

The intellectual conscience.— I keep having the same experience and keep resisting it every time. I do not want to believe it although it is palpable: the great majority of people lacks an intellectual conscience. Indeed, it has often seemed to me as if anyone calling for an intellectual conscience were as lonely in the most densely populated cities as if he were in a desert. Everybody looks at you with strange eyes and goes right on handling his scales, calling this good and that evil. Nobody even blushes when you intimate that their weights are underweight; nor do people feel outraged; they merely laugh at your doubts. I mean: the great majority of people does not consider it contemptible to believe this or that and to live accordingly, without first having given themselves an account of the final and most certain reasons pro and con, and without even troubling themselves about such reasons afterward: the most gifted men and the noblest women still belong to this “great majority.” But what is goodheartedness, refinement, or genius to me, when the person who has these virtues tolerates slack feelings in his faith and judgments and when he does not account the desire for certainty as his inmost craving and deepest distress—as that which separates the higher human beings from the lower.
Among some pious people I found a hatred of reason and was well disposed to them for that; for this at least betrayed their bad intellectual conscience. But to stand in the midst of this rerum concordia discors and of this whole marvelous uncertainty and rich ambiguity of existence without questioning, without trembling with the craving and the rapture of such questioning, without at least hating the person who questions, perhaps even finding him faintly amusing—that is what I feel to be contemptible, and this is the feeling for which I look first in everybody. Some folly keeps persuading me that every human being has this feeling, simply because he is human. This is my type of injustice.

>> No.12392748
File: 44 KB, 500x539, 2nd_dark_age.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12392748

>>12388229
That's the first step actually. What did you expect, being happy ?

>> No.12392762
File: 423 KB, 381x538, 1520000612340.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12392762

Become a realist.
Thomist realist.

>> No.12392771

>>12388229
>Is there a way out of the brainlet loop?
lol no

>> No.12392783
File: 783 KB, 3630x1615, hyperwar.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12392783

>>12392748
>an actual transcuck

go back to lesswrong

>> No.12393007

>>12388303
What an idiot. If science attempts to confirm something it is demarcated as psuedo-science. It needs to falsify.

>> No.12393029

>>12393007
Falsifying is just proving the opposite supposition, brainlet. Your idiotic statement only shows how you watched too much Feynman or other popsci lectures, without ever thinking the statements through, you parrot.

>> No.12393061

>>12393029
How do 'opposites' exist in any way outside of the concepts of our minds? I don't believe some universal 'opposite' can be found in objects, perhaps particular instances, but not universally. If anything this 'opposite' you propose is relative to it's current use, not absolute. If anything the 'science' we're both attempting to communicate to one another is relativistic.

>> No.12393068

>>12393061
I suggest finishing highschool and taking a course in boolean algebra.

>> No.12393069

>>12388727
>if you allow your kids to to inform themselves on their own before being sufficiently indoctrinated they're not going to obey you
so this is the power of ancient greek philosophy

>> No.12393092

>>12393068
>Doesn't understand nominalism
These concepts or abstract objects only exists as instrumental constructs. They signify something in objective reality while not sharing that same objective reality. Unless you're a Platonist, which is laughable as the forms can never be proven.

>> No.12393296
File: 57 KB, 297x475, Prometheus Rising.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12393296

>>12388229
you've realized that all reality-tunnels are essentially arbitrary.
generalize this knowledge:
>The map is not the territory.
now go beyond:
just because they are fundamentally illusory, doesn't mean they can't be useful. Choose your realities, use them and discard them as needed.

>> No.12393318

>>12388727
where is this from?

>> No.12393387

>>12393296
>just because they are fundamentally illusory, doesn't mean they can't be useful. Choose your realities, use them and discard them as needed.

How do you know they're fundamentally illusory. One of the worldviews could be true in an absolute sense.

>you've realized that all reality-tunnels are essentially arbitrary.
This claim is relative to its own axioms. Even though the perspective makes a meta-claim about other perspectives, I can't see how it's actually absolute -- much like contextualist/relativist claims about existence.

>> No.12393405

>>12393092
oh do tell me wise one, what constitutes objective reality? distinguish for me a mere "construct" from something "objective".

>> No.12393410

>>12393092
>laughable bc can't be proven
Yikes, we got STEMoid here, who thinks scientific hypothesis are ever "proven", or that something is without value if it cannot be "proven"

>> No.12393419

if you cant know nuffin why don't you fucking morons load up a Beretta pistol and play Russian Roulette with it

what a fuckin pseud shit thread

>> No.12393426
File: 944 KB, 1337x694, 1534635391695.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12393426

>>12393419
>implying I haven't already

>> No.12393557

>>12393387
Such is the nature of map-making (language)!
When you try to express truth it comes out in paradoxes, and the logically sound statements clearly cannot represent actual reality.

>One of the worldviews could be true in an absolute sense.
how? how could this possibly be? If you made a map that is absolutely representative of the real territory, you'd have to represent each baryon, each electron, and their precise velocities. At that point you've got a simulation that is indistinguishable from reality.
Without the metaphor now: For any string of words to be absolutely true, the universe would have to be fundamentally encoded in some language, you'd have to learn this language, and then your statements in that language would be absolutely true. This is the only logical possibility. I for one don't waste my time with such silly idealism.

And again, does this make language hopelessly inadequate? Only for lofty philosophical goals! For everyday use, it's more than enough.

>This claim is relative to its own axioms.
yes. I am saying you need to use your right hemisphere. Your left brain demands axioms, and even then it cannot grasp the truth. The left brain is a servant. It can only be effective or ineffective. Any "truth" must reside in the right brain, a priori.

>> No.12393645

>>12388286
Fuck yeaaaa

>> No.12394259

Start by selling all your belongings and giving the money to the poor. Then follow me.

>> No.12395196

>>12388735
IT'd probably work actually. Just like drinking 5ml of bleach every day and beating your head against the wall-

>> No.12396305

>>12388286
>Agree with EVERYTHING you read and accept all of the consequences
That's pretty much myself, am I a neo-leibnizscean?

>> No.12396909

>>12388229
Ignorance is bliss.

>> No.12398463

>>12392387
Ironically this

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
reCAPTCHA
Action