[ 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: 155 KB, 1024x771, wittgenstein.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1454707 No.1454707 [Reply] [Original]

Anyone in the mood for some philosophy discussions?

>> No.1454710

I subscribe to Virtue Ethics

>> No.1454711

>>1454710

What's that, sir?

>> No.1454712

Anyone in the mood for some my opinion > your opinion discussions?

>> No.1454716

>>1454711

it is a moral philosophy

>> No.1454721

>>1454712

That's a good point.
Doesn't every reasoning end somewhere? And in this point isn't there always blind acceptance of something?

>> No.1454728

I am a Thomist

>> No.1454736

Reading Spinoza's Ethics right now. I'm in the middle of the second book. I'm a bit lost sometime but I was told it's getting more interesting in book 3 and followings.

>> No.1454737
File: 20 KB, 288x358, rand.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1454737

>> No.1454741

>>1454711
The most pathetic subjectivist theory of ethics imaginable, make post modernists look bright.

>> No.1454744

Wouldn't it make more sense to take certain lessons from many philosophies and try to live your life according to those, rather than stick to one ideology you can't be purely true to anyhow?
A dumbass philosophy question probably, but it seems like a lot of the bickering that happens in some of these threads come from people staunchly defending things that clearly state they shouldn't be staunchly defended, but placed in context and evolved through debate and mediation.

>> No.1454746

I think the question of theism vs atheism is largely unnecessary and pointless.

>> No.1454755

>>1454737

>ohboyherewego.jpg

>> No.1454758

>>1454746
I want to kill every motherfucker who asks me "Do you believe in God?"

1- What god are you refering to, dammit? What concept of God are you talking about? Define your terms, you twat.
2- The existence or inexistence of this god is pointless. It's not even a real question.

We don't care wether or not God (whatever that refers to) exists. What's really interesting is which concept of God people create, what's the problem it's connected with, how does it affect their lives...

>> No.1454761

>philosophy discussions
>posts picture of wittgenstein

good one OP

>> No.1454764

It always intrigues me how americans STILL are busy with the whole theism x atheism debate even though you guys had ONLY IN THE LAST CENTURY a dozen or maybe more incredibly bright and illuminating philosophers in the so-called analytic philosophy movement.

If people read Wittgenstein with more perseverance, a lot of discussions would just disappear for good.

>> No.1454766

>>1454755
inb4 you're a secular humanist and you may not know a lot about philosophy but you know what you believe

>> No.1454768

>philosophy discussions
>posts picture of wittgenstein

>good one OP

OP here, I laughed hard. Old habits, man... old habits... and, after all, 100 years later, people still don't take witt's concept of Philosophy too seriously. they be too busi talking bout gawd

>> No.1454775
File: 110 KB, 894x894, 1290594797368.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1454775

>>1454744
No, because /lit/ is filled with hipster faggots who think it's cool to base your entire life around one philosophical idea and go "hurr durr I a smart person with unparalleled levels of sophistication".

>> No.1454788

>6.44 It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists

>4.1212 What can be shown cannot be said.
(what cannot be said can be shown)

Religiousfags = 1
Atheist/logicianfags = 0

>> No.1454793

>>1454775
I really do think that's kind of an unfair answer. I'm not making a judgment, just posing a question, because there might be a reason why any sort of mix-and-match I'm talking about could be seen as just... deluded? Diluted, maybe? It just doesn't make sense?

>> No.1454799

>>1454788

Everyone knows the Tractatus was just a great big joke. Wittgenstein probably wrote it under the effect of mushrooms or hysteria (common among soldiers in world war I).

Please advance till 1930 for some good philosophizing.

>> No.1455372

“I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud.” ~Carl Jung.

>> No.1455835

>>1454758
That oversimplifies in the wrong direction, I mean first of all you use "God" with a capital G in your post which implies the god of Abraham, second asking for definition in terms is just jackassery you're asking only to play a specific language game that is stacked in your favor, in standard rhetoric such things are completely unnecessary.

As to your second point, you're almost there, but you fail to recognize that its not a meaningless proposition, but one that evaluates to false for standard use of "to exist" while this doesn't convey much about the actual status of God as a transcendent being it does limit discussion by stipulating the possible relationship to go.

God clearly doesn't exist, that is the relationship of any supposed non-physical, non-extended entity to us is not consistent with the conventional use of the term exist. This says nothing about the ability of some non-physical non-extended entity to pass judgement on our own non-existent souls, and to do whatever other godly works god the father oversees.