[ 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: 342 KB, 1000x800, Baskhirtseff_Despair_1882-large[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6106749 No.6106749 [Reply] [Original]

>literally every ideology and school of thought is wrong

>> No.6106752

Okay, lets check them all figuratively now.

>> No.6106780
File: 459 KB, 500x579, 1421199053209.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6106780

yfw your thinking of everything as wrong is wrong

>> No.6106790

Everything is right; from a certain point of view.

>> No.6106809

>>6106749
Try Praxis.

>> No.6106813

>>6106749
>still being mired in a paradigm that quantifies things as right or wrong

>> No.6106818

>>6106790
That makes them wrong from quite a lot more. Just saying ...

>> No.6106835

>>6106818
Everybody is right and everybody is wrong after all.

>> No.6106847

>>6106780

stfu slavoj

>> No.6106866
File: 897 KB, 680x543, thisartalure.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6106866

>>6106749
>2015
>believing in truth

>> No.6106871

just get stoned and listen to pop radio

>> No.6106874

>the concept of "wrong" is just a socially constructed idea

>> No.6106878

>>6106866
They had regularly shaped fish hooks in the middle ages ffs.

>> No.6106892

>>6106878
Yeah, I don't get that about that picture, either. This isn't a hook. This looks like two screws.
I mean, fucking seriously, people have been catching fish since forever, and we had figured out the hook pretty early.

Still like this better than the other bait pictures.

>> No.6106976

>>6106749
They're not wrong but no particular school is wholly right either.
I believe some hold more truth than others, meaning some may involve more work discerning lies and crap from anything truly meaningful.
Eventually you'll see the theme unfolding and it becomes much easier.

>> No.6106991

>>6106874
It's like I'm in 5th grade all over again.

>> No.6107004

>>6106749
Whatever school of thought comforts you is the correct one.

>> No.6107014

>>6106991
explain

>> No.6107018

>>6107014
I'm trying to sound precocious.

>> No.6107046
File: 901 KB, 500x281, Cuckoo.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6107046

>>6106749

>> No.6107066

>>6107004
Why would comfort be a measure of correctness?>>6106835
Can anything even be stated with certainty?

>> No.6107074

not wrong, just incomplete.

>> No.6107204
File: 53 KB, 200x280, Heidegger.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6107204

>>6106749
All schools of thought are wrong to the extent that they are not ABSOLUTELY right. If reality is constantly in flux, how can any model of it be absolutely true? Most of the people here lack the philosophical tools to make progress when comes to dealing to absolutism.

>>6106790
>Everything
>Right

No, not all theory, mental model, etc are equally valid. Some hold more strength than others, none being absolutely true.

>> No.6107214

>ideology is about being right or wrong

That's not how it works mein negger. Ideology is about power and imagination, it is the child's playing with the shadows of his torch over the wall.

>> No.6107502

>>6106790
You must do what you feel is right, of course.

>> No.6109141

>>6107204
Why did you use a photo of Heidegger? This shit sounds more like a weak interpretation of Hegel.

>> No.6109157

>>6106749
>not understanding what youre reading

>> No.6109463
File: 43 KB, 720x295, 1414763522044.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6109463

>>6109141

>> No.6109517
File: 450 KB, 1660x2500, alimichael.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6109517

>>6107004
I agree with this. It's almost a truism but still its worth mentioning.

ideologically-saturated acts like being kind to strangers, donating to charity or sacrificing yourself for your country for example are all indirect modes of hedonism. the individual may experience some physical pain in the process but ultimately the emotional reward is greater. so in other words, we're all hedonists, some are just more open about it than others

>> No.6109527

>>6109517
this

i have an ideology for every day of the week

>> No.6109537
File: 6 KB, 136x160, maxy boy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6109537

>>6109517
ayy lmao

you fucks finally get it

>> No.6109544

>>6109517
i call it selfless vanity

>> No.6109547

>>6109544
or socially-acceptable vanity

>> No.6109559 [DELETED] 

>>6109517
Perhaps, thus, the point is to ask how to go beyond hedonism in asking the the question is why hedonism ? where does this come from ?

>> No.6109566

>>6109517#
Perhaps, thus, the point is to ask how to go beyond hedonism in asking the question why hedonism ? where does this come from ? Is it relevant to what purpose ? What problems it entails, what problems it solves ?

>> No.6109584

>>6109537
>>6109517
psychological egoism is unfalsifiable trash

not to mention, extrapolating from psychological egoism to any normative statements commits the naturalistic fallacy

Fuck if everyone on /lit/ went to a philosophy 101 course the Stirnerites would disappear overnight

>> No.6109608

>>6109584
there are several things wrong about your post. One of them is identifying Stirner's thought as psychological egoism. The next is the claim that Stirner (or indeed either of the two posters you cite) make any normative claims.

>> No.6109626

>>6109584
ur mom is unfalsifiable trash but I took a philosophy 101 course in her pussy n.e.way :^)

>> No.6109632

>>6109608
Stirner (or at least Stirner according to /lit/) is obviously a psychological egoist, "involuntary egoism" is central to his thought, asking us to instead become self aware egoists. Specifically to this thread, the first linked post was expressing an explicitly psychological egoist view, and the second post was a picture of Stirner saying "you finally get it".

As for an expression of normative views, the first post was expressing support for the idea that any ideology (including, presumably, ethics, with its inherent normative content, but also other schools of though that have truth value, truth value being in turn implicitly normative) that comforts you is the correct one, because "in the end", we're all egoist hedonists

>> No.6109638

>>6106790
>>6106835
>the mind of a subjectivist

>> No.6110250
File: 33 KB, 800x430, AynRand_OLiver-Show-800x430.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6110250

>>6109517
>>6109544
>>6109537

Hey guys, whats going on in here?

>> No.6110299

>>6109141
because Heidegger appealed to process rather than substance, unlike Hegel. Big fucking difference.

>> No.6110311

>>6109141
explain

>> No.6110315

Traditional metaphysics is the only right system of thought. Our civilization will go to shit if we continue to ignore it

>> No.6110339

>>6109517
>>6107004
This is a fucking pure denial of reality. Everything is equally valid to you idiots. This is what happens when human beings are sheltered to an extreme: whatever stupid shit that makes them feel GOOD and feel comfortable is valid and true to the facts because they never make contact with facts face to face, you morons never make contact with reality as such. All of you live in your fucking heads. Don't talk about philosophy, or wisdom, or knowledge. Please, you morons, do me this favor.

>> No.6110346

>>6110315
>Traditional metaphysics
what exactly do you refer to when you say "traditional metaphysics"? please be thorough with your response and don't just give me the names of two or three figures or theories.

>> No.6110802

>>6106749
Agreed. Thats why i abandoned my studies in philosophy.

>> No.6110815

>>6110339
Okay, so what about people who have been completely without shelter their entire lives? What is the objectively correct view according to them?

>> No.6110820

>>6110346
Aristotelianism broadly speaking.

>> No.6111152

>>6110820
Please, continue. What about aristotelianism is "right"?

>> No.6111161
File: 23 KB, 283x355, sophist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6111161

>>6106749
>tfw you have overcome the childish need for truth
>tfw post-right/wrong dichotomy

>> No.6111162

>>6106878
>>6106892
Look at the image. The site it was made on uses clip art.

>> No.6111174

>>6110815
Whether one was sheltered to an extreme or not isn't the only variable. i.e intelligence, courage, etc.

I stated my views at >>6107204

>> No.6111184
File: 6 KB, 275x183, raw.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6111184

>All statements are true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true and false and meaningless in some sense.
~R.A.Wilson

You can't beat this

>> No.6111186

>>6106749
Just pick the right parts of them all, anon.

We po-mo now, nobody can stop you.

>> No.6111189

>>6111184
Mr RAW runs into trouble when it turns out that not all statements are equally true, nor are they equally false.

>> No.6111198
File: 232 KB, 905x881, kitty.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6111198

>>6111184
What a delicious non-statement.

>> No.6111199

>>6106749
What about the "all ideologies are wrong" ideology?

>> No.6111201

>>6111189
Well, I guess that's true in some sense.
False in some sense, meaningless in some...

>> No.6111207

>>6111201
You're not saying anything until you prove to me how it's true in some sense, false in some sense, or meaningless in some sense. I'm not saying RAW is wrong, it's just that that's a given when we're dealing with degrees of truth and not absolutism.

>> No.6111260

I dislike how /lit/ seems to take the term ideology to be the same as opinion, belief, philosophy or even ideas. Each one of those things is different. Ideology is not something you think about and speak out loud, but notions that are unconscious to you but that nevertheless guide the way you process your thoughts and act the way you act. You may have never heard of Jesus and be acting through a christian ideology, because ideology is not much about what you say you are or what you say you believe and think, but effectively what you are saying in between the lines of your actions. It's also not arbitrary that it is unconscious, it is precisely that point that you don't want to admit because without it, you cannot form a coherent image of the world, it is traumatic. You cannot see beyond it, at least not without a big transformation. So for instance, you say "every ideology is wrong", posting a sad girl and I could interpret that the problem is that every ideology is wrong, and set to find one that is not or try to console you in some way. Or I could understand that behind the sadness for the fact that every ideology is wrong lies the ideology that acts on you and that makes you seeks way of thinking that answers you in a satisfying way, something that you could label as right. So the trouble is not where to find something that is right, but what other ways are there other than expecting something to be right. That is, instead of searching some place else, you change the nature of the search on a much deeper level.

>> No.6111285

>>6111260
haha awesome, look at this long ass wallof text that nobody is going to read

>> No.6111293

>>6111207
The point that RAW is poking is that some people really believe in the contrary. That certain things are true, and necessarily other things are false and necessarily other things are meaningless. I think the issue is not so much degrees of truth, but contexts that allow something to be perceived as true or false or meaningless. Something can only be true in relation to something, same for false and meaningless. It might appear to be a given to you, but there are really lots of peoples who get their jimmies rustled by that thought.

>> No.6111321

>>6111285
can confirm didn't read :^)

>> No.6111697

>denying the principle of non-contradiction
Absolutely disgusting

>> No.6111725

>>6109584

>unfalsifiable

So you admit defeat?

>> No.6111728

>>6111697
>denying the principle of contradiction

>> No.6111739

>>6111697

If your philosophy does not include contradiction and being a hypocrite, it is a shitty philosophy.

>> No.6111797

>>6106749
Don't worry. There's a website out there where you can learn to be less wrong.

>> No.6113951

>>6107204
Lol, do you really think adding a picture of Heidegger will give you a pass on your stupid shit?

>> No.6113981

>>6109517
who is this dasein fraulein?

>> No.6114197

>>6107502
If you strike me down I shall become more powerful then you can ever imagine

>> No.6114223
File: 290 KB, 1200x1198, IMG_20150209_011639.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6114223

>>6113981
it's a secret

>> No.6114252

>>6113981
ali michael

>> No.6114827
File: 35 KB, 905x845, heidegger6.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6114827

>>6113951
I used the image of Heidegger for a reason, and it pertains to his metaphysics. Can you guess what it is without sounding like a moron? I'll be surprised if you respond.

>> No.6114866

>>6106749
I know, that's why I respond to all intellectual disscussion with an advanced form of sincereposting that is conventionally indistinguishable from shitposting.

>> No.6114896

>>6113981

>how do i into failname??