/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13593108]

What can one do to "make it" as a philosopher?
They can include going to a school for philosophy, but that can't be the only way

[lalo No.13593120]

There has been si Manu attacks I cannot remember, that is for being the strongest way on philosophy

[Anonymous No.13593124]

Write a meme book

[Anonymous No.13593238]

if your wish still is to "make it" as "a philosopher" your philosophy doesn't really sound that fresh or interesting desu.

[Anonymous No.13593876]

Just work at all the new philosophy factories starting up

[Anonymous No.13594214]

>>13593108
Hmm well you can try building a name for yourself in public forums.

[Anonymous No.13594235]

>>13594214
>Use a trip code
No thank you

[Anonymous No.13594299]

>>13594214
What sort of forums?

>>13593108

How to "make it"? The same way you "make it" in any other field.

You make sure the reader is always comfortable. You never tell them anything they don't want to hear. Your points are always "in good taste". You never somehow put them in the position where they could believe themselves to be wrong or have done something wrong. You never antagonize them, question them, or otherwise challenge their beliefs. Give them very agreeable points, very simple ones, then make them believe they are revolutionary.

Basically you want a high uptake rate, very accessible, something that people won't turn their nose up at. Make them feel safe, it's like sex, you want them to be willing and enjoying what you're doing, they need to trust you, they need to have faith that you're not a threat, that you're not going to hurt them, and that you have good intentions.

When people don't "consent" to your philosophy, it doesn't matter how legitimate or correct it is. Even if it is correct, you can only attract independent objective thinkers who can understand things beyond the perspective of what they already know and believe. These people are the minority, and when the general public condemns them, when they are ostracized for being abnormal, this means you can't be successful.

Also, philosophy is not a real objective field like science, it is an ivory tower field, you can't really be objectively correct, you have to please the "authority" who then give you an acknowledgement of legitimacy or illegitimacy based upon their opinion.

Make these people feel good about themselves, stroke their ego, make them feel significant, it's more likely that the established community will support you. Don't do this blatantly, make it seem as earnest as possible,but still, the community and the authority in that subject will be far more prone to trust you if they "consent", where they like what you are saying and it does not threaten them, it does not challenge them, meaning their own authority and legitimacy is not threatened by respecting your point.

People are narcisisstic, they have instinctive self-preservation, and whether you are challenging or threatening their peace of mind, their own ideals, their own beliefs, their own legitimacy, or their own authority, the people aren't going to like that. In a field that depends entirely upon public opinion rather than any sort of objective or empirical tests for legitimacy, the opinions of these people is largely the only relevant factor in being acknowledged or respected.

I'm a "philosopher", meaning an arrogant self-righteous douchebag with delusions of my own god-like authority. I just don't have the meekness of these spineless bastards who need to seek approval of their community before they go so far as to have a thought. This is why I tend to experience profound disapproval whenever I write things.

[Anonymous No.13594400]

>>13594299
I recommend starting on YouTube then eventually expanding out to Twitter. YouTube is great for getting a simple message across.