[ 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: 1.09 MB, 2048x1366, Baby's first existential crisis.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3548835 No.3548835 [Reply] [Original]

So, what do you personally think of each option in the image, which seem the best for you, which are you living right now if any?

>Ubermensch - not for me, I'm just not alpha by nature and even though I like some of what herr N had to say.
>Religion - nope, can't believe in God, just won't work
>Political - I don't care enough and I'm too jaded for this one, besides all political systems seem too flawed for me to invest my life to promote them
>Hedonism - maybe a subdued form like Epicureanism, this is probably what I'm doing now but failing horribly, no qt3.14, etc.
>Buddhism - too ascetic for my tastes, though I do like meditation and try to incorporate it into my life.
>Absurdism - Nope, too depressive, I don't want to be on the edge of nihilism all my life
>Tao/Zen - this is probably my favorite one if I had to choose one, I try to live like this but fail miserable, I'm just anxious.

>> No.3548873

Lol, you only get to this point in the first place if you give up in the belief of progress. Just because we haven't found good/God yet does not mean we won't. We used to think the moon was an immaterial thing beyond the reach of the world. Now men have walked on the moon. When HIV/AIDS first appeared, it seemed unstoppable and unknowable. A week ago a baby born with HIV was cured. Progress is possible, being alive right now is better than at any other time in the past, and if we work hard and live with wisdom and compassion, we can do better in the future.

>> No.3548878

>>3548835
>Evola
>Implying he thought religion was an opiate.

This chart...

>> No.3548895

>>3548873
And someday we'll have flying cars; and then the mysteries of life and death will seem insignificant.
Technological progress is consolation for morons, children, and toymakers.

>> No.3548905

>>3548878
Yeah, it's not perfect, I guess you have to simplify this to fit everyone into a few categories, the point is that he is a political writer looking at this problem from the right wing

>> No.3548914

>>3548905
But Evola's work falls into different categories. His most fruitful material is closer to the Heidegger/Zen camp in this chart.

>> No.3548987

I'm mostly experimenting with simplicity in all things. I'm not very interesting in the whole abstract meaning/purpose thing at the moment so I'm looking at philosophy as some sort of ars vivendi. I'm working towards the ability to be happy with very little, both materially and philosophically. "In fact a minimum of life, an unfettering from all coarser forms of sensuality, an independence in the midst of all marks of outward disfavour, together with the pride in being able to live in the midst of all this disfavour: a little cynicism perhaps, a little of the "tub of Diogenes” a good deal of whimsical happiness, whimsical gaiety, much calm, light, subtle folly, hidden enthusiasm" as Freddy would put it. So far it has served me well.

>> No.3548996

Where are Heidegger and Wittgenstein?

>> No.3549001

>>3548996
Oh wait, there he is.

>> No.3549017

>>3548895
How do you know that we will never find inherent good/God? If we are not absolutely certain that there is no inherent goodness to the world, do we not have an obligation to look for it? Please do not give up.

>> No.3549041
File: 2.05 MB, 480x271, yesitis2.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3549041

>>3549017
lel

>> No.3549048

>>3549017
I am absolutely certain that there is no objective morality that isn't anything less than a positive understanding of the summation of all actions a la Spinoza's God.

>> No.3549053
File: 73 KB, 520x793, hunter-s-thompsons-very-angry-reaction-to-a-piece.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3549053

That image is stupid as fuck.

I like how it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the ubermensch concept, going as far as suggesting to read Beyond Good and Evil and not Thus Spoke Zarathursta.

And then it goes and suggests shit like Marxism, "religious existentialism," and Buddhism. Why not suggest Republicanism, Mormonism, or making a fantasy football team? Because the whole thing reeks of pseudo-intellectualism so badly I'm shocked that veganism wasn't included as one of the "answers."

This single image encapsulates the /lit/ at its most insufferable: teenage, armchair philosophers spouting on about concepts they don't understand and passing it off as helpful advice, all wrapped up in a sense of smug condescension.

>> No.3549060

>>3549017
Goodness is an interpretation. Physically speaking, this interpretation can be engineered by altering the brain.

That worried me for a long time. However, I've concluded that the reason we shun this possibility with horror is because we retain our social instincts. We still seek independence and dignity, which, crudely put, means not being the tribe's bitch. Our grammatical conception of forces is social; we can't help but see a malfunctioning computer as being insolent, so we thump it. Likewise we can't help but see such an interference with our minds as an attack, and naturally we defend against it, and always will, because it would truly incapacitate us to be permanently happy. In the end, we prefer dignity to happiness, and won't (consciously) allow ourselves to be deceived with an artificial vision of dignity, or an incapacitating happiness.

>> No.3549090

>>3549053
>armchair philosophers
I just wanted to point out how much I like this expression. It's like "Petite bourgeoisie", I don't know exactly why, but I get a warm feeling everytime I hear this kind of expressions, they make me giggle like a total faggot.

>> No.3549098
File: 19 KB, 281x228, fidel-castro-sm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3549098

>>3549053
have you ever thought that maybe it was just made for fun? Sometimes you people take everything so seriously, my god

>> No.3549103
File: 126 KB, 640x483, 1360811291575.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3549103

>>3549041
And this guy. Oh, this guy! I just love him. This thread is full of little random things I love.

>> No.3549116

>>3549112

That's /sci/ and /pol/ you're thinking of.

>> No.3549112

>>3549098
Don't forget /lit/ is like a sanctuary for raging autists.

>> No.3549143

>>3549098
Really? That's the best argument you can come up with?

Let stupid people derp all over the place, making up bullshit and passing it off as knowledge, let them misinform the public, because it's all just a bit of fun?

No. I can't allow that.

>> No.3549163
File: 3 KB, 100x100, 1300044776986.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3549163

>>3549143
>I can't allow that
>allow
>4chan

nigga just what are you going to do?
oh wait, no, don't sage...

>> No.3549173

>>3549143
Don't you know it's rude to tell people they're wrong?

When someone is awful at singing, you lie and tell them they're good. When someone is fat, you lie tell them they look great. When someone misinterprets Nietzsche, you pat them on the back and tell them how smart they are.

>> No.3549182

>>3549173
I thought the only thing that could happen when someone ever misinterprets Nietzsche was engaging on a heated argument that would only possibly end calling him a faggot.

>> No.3549904

>>3548996
Wittgenstein would be with traditional Buddhism.

>> No.3549912

>>3548835
Taoism and Buddhism are theistic religions

>> No.3549917

>>3548835
this graph is shite.

>> No.3549956

>>3549912
Nope

>> No.3549961

>>3549956
yep

>> No.3549963

>>3549961
Nope.

>> No.3549973

>>3549963
yep.

>> No.3549978

>>3549973
No sir

>> No.3550018
File: 5 KB, 200x175, goodcharlotte.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3550018

>mfw not just figuring it out for yourself

spooks

>> No.3550657

>>3549053
there's a mistake
>belles lettre
should be
>belles lettres

>> No.3550661

>dont care about material things
>dont care about physical pleasure
>cant look for peace in religion
>experience constant unrest

>> No.3550664

>>3549912
>>3549956
>>3549961
>>3549963
>>3549973
>>3549978

You're both correct and incorrect. The theistic-ness varies based on the region and of course the individuals.

>> No.3550676

whoever made that image is an entry-level scum

>> No.3550680

>>3550661

Take drugs.

>> No.3550682

>>3550676

Can 'scum' be singular?

>> No.3550705

>>3550676
Isn't that the point? It's entry level philosophy. The image is meant for people who have made literally no decisions regarding what they want their life philosophy to be, and are looking to start.

>> No.3550720

>>3550705

>decisions regarding what they want their life philosophy to be

aaaaand you've betrayed yourself as a fucking moron.

>> No.3550723

>>3550720
What's wrong with deciding what you want your life philosophy to be? Isn't that the idea of the image? Based on on how you feel and live your life, read these texts and apply the ideas within to your life?

>> No.3550726

>>3550720
It's always good to first study what appeals to you. Philosophy should be no exception.

>> No.3550730

>>3550723

Yes, of course. Philosophy is a sports draft. Pick a label.

>> No.3550731

>>3550682
>scum
magnificent film.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn7o35NcJwo

"Oim tha Daddy nah, next time oil fackin kill ya.

>> No.3550733

>>3550705
>Isn't that the point?
I don't think the point was for people who know nothing to tell other people who know nothing things they have no clue about.

>> No.3550735

>>3550730
The point of the image, I think, is to determine which philosophy is most in line with your current way of thinking, so you can explore it more thoroughly. You're not supposed to roll a dice.

>> No.3550736

>>3550735
>The point of the image, I think, is to determine which philosophy is most in line with your current way of thinking
Unfortunately, it doesn't even manage to do that.

>> No.3550737

>>3550730
So are you implying you should haphazardly choose a philosophy to research at random?

>> No.3550738

>>3550736
It does if you just read the descriptions and don't focus on the path.

>> No.3550742

>>3550737
I think they're implying that course would still be better than following the chart above.

>> No.3550745

>>3550737

I'm implying that philosophy is a process and should demand that you read everything.

>> No.3550752

>>3550745
Agreed, but at which point do you start? Focus instead of dodging around the issue.

>> No.3550753

>>3550738
>It does if you just read the descriptions
If you really believe that, you're an idiot who has no clue about what you're talking about beyond a "someone told me once that it was a bit like this" Chinese-whispers style understanding.

>> No.3550755

>>3550752

That's up to you. An historical approach is as valid as looking up that which interests you.

>> No.3550758

The chart encourages people with little to no understanding of philosophy to read entry level philosophical texts. Seems like a pretty solid idea to me.

>> No.3550765

>>3550758
Many of the texts aren't entry level and are grossly mischaracterised. The two are probably somewhat related.

>> No.3550767

>>3550753
You're just trolling, it's completely entry level and does a fine job at what it's supposed to.

>> No.3550770

>>3550765
Fair enough

>> No.3550769

>>3550758

People with no understanding of philosophy should ignore this chart. It's like a Cracked.com 'how to solve an existential crisis' guide.

>> No.3550773

>>3550769
>It's like a Cracked.com 'how to solve an existential crisis' guide.
Well put.

>> No.3550782

>>3550769
>It's like a Cracked.com 'how to solve an existential crisis' guide.

There's nothing wrong with that if it gets people into the subject matter.

>> No.3550787

>>3550782
The point is that it doesn't. Clearly whoever made this isn't into the subject matter either.

>> No.3550786
File: 122 KB, 800x1249, 1280.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3550786

diy looks good

>> No.3550797

>getting past the first question in OP's image
>being in an existential crisis

Nope.jpg. First let's combat questions like, who am I? What is the nature of existence? What does it mean to exist? What does 'meaning' exactly mean? Why am inclined to believe one way or another (crave for meaning or not for example)? If I'm determined to be in this way by genes and enviorment what's the right course of action? Why choose (act) anything at all? What is the relationship between my brain, conscious, subconsious, ego? What does it mean to think? Why am I asking these questions? Who am I? What the fuck is going on? Why? What? ?!!!?!!

All these answers in OP's pic are a cop-out from/remedy for the basic questions, pyrrhonian scepticism and the state of never ending existentialism is the only way of truth. Right?

>> No.3550813

i guess i'm a hedonist, in that honestly i only really care about 'feelin good', but living a philosophy is stupid

>> No.3550833

>>3550787
chart is perfectly fine

>> No.3550837
File: 419 KB, 500x282, thechartisperfectlyfine.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3550837

>>3550833
>chart is perfectly fine

>> No.3550840

>>3550833
No it's not. It's incredibly stupid, biased, and has a ton of misconceptions.

>> No.3550843

>>3550813
my suspicions have been acquitted! thanks for summing up the characterizations of an average a bona fide brainless feminist

>> No.3550844

>>3550840
Like the start of any educational journey, thus it's perfectly entry-level.

>> No.3550852

>>3550844
Yeah, you can't really teach others about something you know nothing about.

>> No.3550860

>>3550844
Are you retarded?

There's a reason why first grade students aren't allowed to teach classes, and this chart is it.

When something has a shit ton of errors in it, that doesn't make it "entry-level." Unless, for some reason, you think it's okay to teach new students the wrong definitions and theories in an intro to ___ class.

You must either be a troll or the moron who made this awful flow chart.

>> No.3550862

>>3550852
>>3550860
You guys don't see the big picture.

>> No.3550865

>>3550862
Is the big picture an expanded chart with, paradoxically, even less good information?

>> No.3550866

lel nerds not realizing the nietzschean pseudo-socratian technique this picture is employing


stay virgins,

peace

>> No.3550879

>>3550866

>>3550716

>> No.3551517

>>3550731
Thanks friend, looks interesting.