[ 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: 116 KB, 699x749, 1588054077896[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17893487 No.17893487 [Reply] [Original]

>university philosophy
>have to attend a module on atheist ethics

>> No.17893501

>>17893487
>studying philosophy when you could just read the books in your spare time

>> No.17893517

honestly just go and listen to all the pseuds, then come back here and post what they had to say for some good content

>> No.17893546

>>17893517
this, try record them and make a trasncript

>> No.17893550

>>17893517
ITS CALLED BEING A DECENT FUCKING HUMAN BEING

>> No.17893553

>>17893517
third kind of curious what passes as uni level philosophy courses now

>> No.17893554

>>17893487
>atheist ethics
Literal contradiction of terms.

>> No.17893563

>>17893554
Someone needs a space daddy to tell him not to do the bad things

>> No.17893566

>>17893563
Yes.

>> No.17893568

>>17893563
define 'good' and 'bad'

>> No.17893571
File: 28 KB, 850x400, Dosto.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17893571

>>17893563

>> No.17893572
File: 477 KB, 2211x1182, killmenow.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17893572

>>17893517

>> No.17893577

>>17893568
Forcing women to marry their rapists and owning people=good

Oh wait that's the Bible

>> No.17893587

>>17893572
I'm too dumb for philosophy and that seems pretty interesting. Probably a bad sign though, right?

>> No.17893590

>>17893577
define 'good' and 'bad'

>> No.17893598

>>17893590
whatever we tell you, goyim

>> No.17893617

>>17893487
Fuck off, I'm on a jesuit university studying philosophy and there's like three classes dedicated solely to religion.

>> No.17893637
File: 65 KB, 1068x601, gigachad.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17893637

>>17893563
>hurr durr u hab sky daddy

Why yes, I love and worship my heavenly INFINITE CHAD in the sky. No, I don't need him to tell me to not do bad things because I am a responsible and morally objective GIGACHAD of a Human being unlike morally relative fedora virgins.

>> No.17893644

>>17893577
it's forcing rapists to own the goods they damaged

>> No.17893676

What is the joke of this thread. Can anyone explain it to me?

>> No.17893685

>>17893487

OMG, they have you study the thought of people you don't agree with? Terrible.

>> No.17893689
File: 13 KB, 650x650, 1560351700681.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17893689

>>17893676
>atheist
>ethics

>> No.17893691

>>17893617
>fuck off I'm in a religiously affiliated university and I have to study religion so you're lying

>> No.17893737

>>17893501
this.
Why go in debt for the most useless degree?
>>17893563
What about thousands of generations of trial and error?
Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom

>> No.17893745

>>17893737
>debt
in my country college is about 2500 europoors a year. I can easily make this back working during the summer.

>> No.17893799

>>17893689
I think I am not American enough to understand this

>> No.17893826

>>17893745
still a waste of pesos

>> No.17893829

>>17893799
atheism is just religious devotion to nihilism, the idea of ethics generally implies some sort of objective moral imperative, a concept which is completely and utterly incompatible with nihilism from a logical standpoint

>> No.17893895

>>17893799
Without a connection to a supra-rational spiritual order that provides instinctual moral laws, all morality becomes subservient to rationality, i.e. something is allowed if you can make a logical argument for it being allowed. This turns into everything being allowed

It's the same thing with religion based on pure rationality, it turns into Quaker-tier secularism

>> No.17894015

>>17893487
>university
first mistake

>> No.17894074

>athiesm ethics
Lol

>> No.17894738

>>17893487
How is it possible to have any sort of ethical system as an atheist? They have no theological doctrine to serve as the 'axioms' of the system. All atheist ethics devolve to 1) circular logic or 2) vague unprovable statements based on feelings or 'human nature' (which, strangely enough, always ends up being extremely similar to Judeo-Christian ethics and never like Islamic ethics, Indian ethics or Oriental ethics)

Just man up and face the fact. You are either religious and ethical. Or you are atheist and post-ethical. Which means you are animalistic (hedonist) or machinistic (utilitarian), and there's nothing wrong with being post-ethical in the current year. But to pretend to be ethical while atheist is just pitiful self-denial. It means you're either in denial about being religious or in denial about being ethical.

>> No.17894747

>philo student afraid of ideas outside of his comfort zone
what a surprise

>> No.17894748

>>17893563
morality, like any other set of rules, is only effective so long as it can be enforced. however unlike any other set of rules, morality is neither subjective nor objective, but instead universal. no authority on earth is capable of enforcing a universal law, thus faith in god is necessary. if you do not believe in god, you cannot be moral. sorry but that's how it works

>> No.17894760

>>17894738
You should sign up for this class and make this point on the first class meeting.

>> No.17894782

>>17894760
Ngl I am a hugely edgy contrarian, so I would pull that kind of stuff

I actually attended a philo lecture at uni and wrote a final paper on David Hume's skepticism, about how his ideas could be used to argue that all of human knowledge and everything we learned this semester could be worthless garbage. Got an A somehow though

>> No.17894787

>>17894738
It's the same with all arguments, atheist or not. To this day no one has come up with an irrefutable moral system. The pagans of old didn't bother, it was only when Christianity tried to enforce its conception of rational "natural law" that people thought morality might be "solved." Of course, that didn't last for long, and eventually Ecclesiastes (the true prophecy of the outcome of Christianity) came true.

>> No.17894795

>>17893487
how can you want to study philosophy without studying philosophies you might not agree with?

>> No.17894833

>>17893617
jewish university af

>> No.17894839

>>17894787
Christian morals, or any proper ethical system founded on absolute religious principles (such as Islamic ethics or Buddhist ethics) are irrefutable. They cannot be refuted because they are correct within the axioms that they were based on.

You might disagree with those ethics, you might find them less favourable compared to other systems, but that's not the same as being refutable.

I hate Newton's Laws of Thermodynamics, but I can't refute them given the axioms of modern physics. See the difference?

All religious ethical systems are irrefutable by definition.

>> No.17894846

>>17893568
If Gigachad = good
If Basedjak = bad

>> No.17894945

>>17893799
Christians are trying to monopolize being a decent person so they can guilt people into joining their cult, it's nothing new

>> No.17894975

>>17894839
I can say the same thing about atheist ethics. The ethical system (like Kant's categorical imperative) is correct given the axioms they base their system on. The point is, it doesn't matter whether you have an axiom or not, those axioms are all pure conjecture without any testable or rationally provable validity (like physics and mathematics respectively). Positing a God arbitrarily and assuming he condones x and y moral laws is essentially the same as positing a categorical imperative based on universal human nature and principles of reason, which is what Kant did.

>> No.17895052
File: 16 KB, 320x320, fedora pipe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17895052

>>17894975

>> No.17895054

>>17894945
ITS CALLED BEING A DECENT FUCKING HUMAN BEING

>> No.17895117

>>17893501
You will never become a surgeon by just reading books on anatomy. Neither you will understand much from the books without practicing.
Producing texts and engaging in dialectics is philosophical practice. Typing shitposts and engaging in bad faith shit-flinging does not make you a philosopher.

>> No.17895139
File: 92 KB, 650x400, soy baker.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17895139

>>17893577
that measure actually helped women during those times, when nobody would marry a raped woman. this was also done with the father's permission.

is taking passages of the Bible out of context (both scriptural and spatial/temporal) the height of secular criticism of Christian morality?

>> No.17895147

>>17895117
Only difference is that surgeons are given practical field training you tard, whereas there is nothing similar in philosophy. You can become a philosopher reading from the comfort of your bed.

>> No.17895163

>>17895052
I'm not an atheist. I believe in supramundane reality, but morals are still a cope for the small-minded.
>>17895117
Dialectics are not "philosophical practice." The only philosophers of note who became famous through dialectics were Plato and Socrates. Kant even argued that philosophy should not be discussed, only read and written about with systematic clarity. Equating philosophy with surgical practice is about as bad-faith an argument as I've ever seen.

>> No.17895177

>>17895054
What is decent human being?

>> No.17895184

>>17895163
>>17895117
you can talk to people outside of philoosphy class lol

>> No.17895276

>>17893571
brainlet take, Dusty

>> No.17895313

>>17895147
>whereas there is nothing similar in philosophy
Just because you have no idea of colloquia and conferences does not mean those don't exist. Neither have you learned basic humility, much less the academic one. Or your country's intellectual culture is a load of poop, then evacuate.
>You can become a philosopher reading from the comfort of your bed.
You keep repeating that to yourself, you absolute consoomer.

>>17895163
>Dialectics are not "philosophical practice."
That's your personal preference. If you present anything decent in written or spoken form at a journal or a conference, you will be all but forced to engage in the dialogue.
>The only philosophers of note who became famous through dialectics
If you ever had a bit of philosophical education, you would knew at least a dozen local philosophers active in dialectics and public speaking. You obviously lack that education, hence you have no idea what you are talking about. Clueless.
Yet you continue your drivel.
>Equating philosophy with surgical practice is about as bad-faith an argument as I've ever seen.
Because you'd rather self-crown yourselves philosopher-kings because you consoomed some texts from the safety of your bedroom and maybe flung some shit on an imageboard.
It is like calling oneself a bodybuilder because you have some weights at home.

>> No.17895314
File: 184 KB, 650x750, 35DB11B2-700A-4133-B2DC-6479D8AB8E57.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17895314

>>17893487
>We hold these truths to be self evident

>> No.17895384

>>17895276
>I'm smarter than Dostoevsky
Yeah okay faggot.

>> No.17895565

>>17893517
This

>> No.17895574

>>17893617
Jesuit unis are competing with Ivy leauge as far as content goes.

>> No.17895585

>>17895276
then how dumb are you since you cant refute it?

>> No.17895640
File: 35 KB, 600x539, 1594736269197.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17895640

>>17895313
>sophist seething cause his degree is worthless and his "practice" is fruitless
I'm a better philosopher than you'll ever be bucko

>> No.17896177

>>17893563
I bet you my sky dad can beat up yours. Oh you have none? Hahaha what a looser

>> No.17896189

>>17895117
I get more constructive comments on blog posts than I ever did from university professors/students

>> No.17896235

>>17893571
Yes.

>> No.17896385

>>17895640
>no u
You ain't even a dog at this point.

>> No.17897291

>>17893572
Lmao imagine paying for public school 2.0

Babby needs his 90IQ overton window non-issues and screeking harpy teachers

>> No.17897319

>>17893487
>signs up willingly for university philosophy
You've done this to yourself
>doesn't want to take a module on atheist ethics
Why? It's probably the most relevant to any modern discussion on philosophy you'll have.
Doesn't mean it's correct, but it's going to come up more if you pursue philosophy to any degree in a modern university.
Might as well go and at least form some sort of argument against it other than a crusty wojak.

>> No.17897341

>>17893572
Honestly what is so bad about this?

>> No.17897402

>>17896189
post your blog

>> No.17897414

>>17893571
lacan did already refute this argument

>> No.17897535

>>17893571
Note how he doesn't say "If there is no God, everything is permissible", brainlets.

>> No.17897580

god i wish i studied philosophy at uni instead of chickening out and getting a "useful" degree just to please my parents.

>> No.17899248

>>17897535
>literally synonyms
Yeah I'm sure if you asked him if what's what he meant he would probably say "Okay sweetie it's called being a DECENT HUMAN BEING you don't need no sky daddy to tell you how to act"