Do all studies in philosophy, whether academic or self directed, eventually result in existential nihilism?

File: 24 KB, 400x449, 7MUTn.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Thu Jul 16 20:55:43 2015 No.6837637 [Reply] [Original]

Do all studies in philosophy, whether academic or self directed, eventually result in existential nihilism?

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 20:57:12 2015 No.6837638 >>6837637 Well it is the only logical conclusion to life. Isn't it?

Anonymous Thu Jul 16 20:57:50 2015 No.6837643

No, sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, sometimes it does just a little, sometimes people read great books and learn nothing, sometimes they read pop-shit and learn a bunch, sometimes, sometimes.

There is no "eventually this...", there is no end to this process of living and thinking.

Now go shave, you look like shit.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 20:58:50 2015 No.6837649 >>6837637 not nihilism, but egoism. because you have dug DEEP DEEP DEEPER THAN THOU DEEPER THAN ANYONE....IN HISTORY YOU ARE...SO CLOSE...TO SOLVING THE PUZZLE... AND YET... THE WALL REMAINS!!!

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 21:00:44 2015 No.6837653 >>6837637 if you're rich it leads to hedonism and optimistic humanism if you're poor it leads to what you said

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 21:09:19 2015 No.6837691 File: 53 KB, 520x408, 1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6837549

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 21:46:36 2015 No.6837858 File: 47 KB, 450x387, Jean-Paul_Sartre_FP.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Sartre > Nietzsche

Anonymous Thu Jul 16 21:51:05 2015 No.6837878

>>6837637

Three years philosophy in uni here.

I always come back to that,

I can honestly not tell you if that is true or it is us that always tend ourselves to that.

As >>6837638 says and as contradictory it may sound at first, it is maybe because deep inside we are logical people, and that is the only logical conclusion to everything

Painful.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 21:52:07 2015 No.6837882 >>6837858 Heh, no.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 21:59:42 2015 No.6837924 No. At university I discovered Scholasticism, and it's strengthened my defences against nihilism (which is really the death of all rationality and philosophy). Final-year philosophy student, straight-As.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:00:26 2015 No.6837926 >>6837858 >Le steal everything from Husserl and Heidegger man

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:01:17 2015 No.6837930 >>6837858 Sarte is camus for edgelords

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:02:13 2015 No.6837936 >>6837924 Wew lad I also have known God or so I'd like to think and I have faith. But I still scream of angst sometimes during the day or at night thinking of my inherent death.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:02:42 2015 No.6837940 >>6837878 No It has nothing to do with logic.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:03:59 2015 No.6837950 >>6837926 >Le be pegged by le frigid SJW So glad Bertolucci kills him and by stabbing him multiple times no less

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:05:00 2015 No.6837959 >>6837940 No, u.

Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:08:59 2015 No.6837979

>>6837959

The short answer is that your "logic" is a reflection of Judeo-Christian thought: "The only way life can have meaning is through eternal, unchanging meaning". Yeah it's attractive I guess but this sort of eternalism is the kind of shit we need to get past.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:13:47 2015 No.6837996 File: 40 KB, 1754x267, 1429139952002.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6837637

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:14:00 2015 No.6837997 >>6837979 Well that isnt contradictory with what I said is it? Maybe judeo-christian thought leads to angst and existential nihilism?

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:15:41 2015 No.6838003 >>6837996 Skepticism and nihilism are one and the same in many ways. Also you cannot be truly skeptical, it is self contradictory. What you can do is feel like shit and be desperate, wanting or not, becoming a nihilist.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:15:54 2015 No.6838005 >>6837996 This

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:19:32 2015 No.6838014 >>6838003 or just laugh at how serious other people take situations that you find utterly absurd, it's the only thing that keeps me from crying in a corner.

Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:22:14 2015 No.6838023

>>6837997

Yeah. It does, but existentialism is a response to God, the eternal meaning-giver, being taken out of an equation requiring the giving of eternal meaning. But many alternatives have been presented since and including Nietzsche. In the paraphrased words of Heidegger responding to Sartre, "don't blame life because you can't find any meaning in it."

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:24:34 2015 No.6838029 >>6837979 Where'd you learn that/how'd you come to that notion? I'd like to know more.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:26:18 2015 No.6838037 No. >source: study both academically and privately, had a nihilism phase but grew up

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:26:41 2015 No.6838040 >>6837996 Quietism is the endgame of philosophy? Fucking hell how dumb do you have to be to believe this. >answers are hard therefore they don't exist

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:27:12 2015 No.6838043 >>6837637 Only if you're an idiot.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:30:36 2015 No.6838055 >>6838029 It's all pretty basic Nietzsche my man. Read "How the real world finally became a myth" or whatever it's titled by him. Really great chapter.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 22:43:59 2015 No.6838110 >>6838037 grew up or solved your cognitive dissonance with some other story? This sounds harsh but i'm extualy interested.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 16 23:22:50 2015 No.6838254 File: 77 KB, 363x500, 1435630204598.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6838055 Thanks, man.

Anonymous Thu Jul 16 23:24:33 2015 No.6838256

>>6838110
No I realized that say for instance you're a nihilist about moral statements I just decided that *I* am the source of objective morality

if I say x is wrong then it is wrong. it is wrong not due to some intrinsic nature of the universe or some sort of higher being but rather it is wrong due to my judgments. I myself am the soucre of moral truths. Because if I think it is a god that gives moral statements their truth, it is still *MY* decision to accept that gods judgements are legitimate. So I just skip the middleman and judge myself.

i.e. if I accept god as the source of moral truths, I still have to trust mysef that my own judgement that gods truths are true, so I just realize that either way it's my own judgment. skip the middelman and just decide for myself what is right and what is wrong

got a moral issue? I'll tell you the right course of action.

>>	Golly !zR/LhJxu0Q Thu Jul 16 23:36:53 2015 No.6838323 >tfw /lit/ is plagued by undergrads

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 08:30:04 2015 No.6839753 >>6838256 i see, tnx.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 08:33:01 2015 No.6839764 >>6838323 >Look, Mom! I posted it again! XDD >le ebin undergrad meme Just stop before you embarrass yourself further.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 08:34:03 2015 No.6839768 >>6839764 can't be more embarrassing than undergradposting

Anonymous Fri Jul 17 10:52:21 2015 No.6840088

>>6838040
>unwarrantably stating "there is a diamond somewhere in this gigantic forest" with no other reason than maybe hoping there is
>getting everyone to look for it
>when someone doesn't want to look because there is no reason to believe there is a diamond in the forest call him dumb

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 11:57:41 2015 No.6840320 >>6837637 No, I am a living counter-example. Philosophy seems to hurt before it truly liberates, however. See Nietzsche-boys for real-world exemplification.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 12:10:17 2015 No.6840360 yes. all analytic and theological philosophers are actually massive trolls spreading lies to earn pathetic wages as part of a great cosmic joke against undergrads and liberal women

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 12:13:38 2015 No.6840372 File: 19 KB, 502x80, nihilism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] nihilists are idiots these days

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 12:23:21 2015 No.6840404 >>6837924 Somewhat similar experience as well.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 12:32:29 2015 No.6840423 Studying philosophy lead me to god

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 12:35:32 2015 No.6840436 File: 212 KB, 1711x1127, _sci_-_Kurt_Godel_s_ontological_proof_-_Science_&_Math_-_4chan_-_2015-06-22_11.57.35.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6837637 DO not forget to LEAVE philosophy through philosophy ITSELF

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 15:19:40 2015 No.6841010 >>6837637 Even outside of Philosophy. Unfortunately, the brain itself is a mistake of evolution.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 15:25:22 2015 No.6841032 >>6841010 >le ebin last messiah meme Go away

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 15:28:34 2015 No.6841045 File: 13 KB, 320x287, 1436489635073.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6840372 This is why I stopped calling myself a nihilist; ever other self-proclaimed nihilist I've ever met has been a total edgelord

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 15:30:24 2015 No.6841056 >>6841045 >This is why I stopped calling myself a nihilist I hate this board and its identity politics

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 15:31:27 2015 No.6841062 >>6841056 you can leave any time, friend

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 15:49:54 2015 No.6841163 >>6841010 That's like saying 'dinosaurs were a mistake t. god'. The perishing of species is part of evolution, there's nothing mistaken about it. PS the notion of a hamburger as sandwich ideologically challenges my preconceptions

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 15:53:56 2015 No.6841185 >>6837637 Existential Nihilism and Hegelianism in its all forms are the two ultimate outcomes. Of course, their synthesis in Freudomarxism is another beast.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 22:51:25 2015 No.6843094 Fitting thread for a phil 101 question. Was Sartre a nihilist? I've always assumed he was connected with existential nihilism, but a friend of mine claims Sartre shows to believe in a vital purpose in some of his works.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 23:18:37 2015 No.6843210 >>6841045 what kind of nihilist are you?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jul 17 23:19:38 2015 No.6843218 >>6843094 he was an existentialist. existentialism was his thing.

Anonymous Fri Jul 17 23:21:17 2015 No.6843224

>>6837637
Depends on you really.

You could accept that nothing lasts or has a deeper meaning and still feel invested in loving others, making art, lounging about or just party all night. Why not, really?

It's just that you are a real downer. Being better read isn't what caused it, you were always predisposed to trouble yourself.

Fortunately, they have drugs for that.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 04:36:03 2015 No.6844024 >>6837637 Nope.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 05:01:57 2015 No.6844069 File: 208 KB, 1904x1049, nihilism-or8.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6840372

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 06:43:25 2015 No.6844228 >>6844069 What app is that?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 07:24:35 2015 No.6844276 >>6837637 Personally I blend nihilism with egoism and skepticism. It's a healthy balance of humility and freedom and still allows me to live what I perceive to be a good life.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 08:10:33 2015 No.6844338 >>6844228 the electronic version of OED [available on the scene]

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 08:12:55 2015 No.6844339 >>6844338 Is this available for a "Windows Computer"?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 08:13:42 2015 No.6844342 >>6841010 This.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 08:38:25 2015 No.6844370

>>6837996
Reminder to avoid all sophistry.

These are the three fundamental sophisms to avoid. If you see anything like them you know to dismiss it because they are ultimately self-contradictory:

1. There is no truth / there is no reality.
2. Even if truth / reality exists, it cannot be known.
3. Even if it can be known, it cannot be communicated.

These are the 3 sophisms lads. Anything that sounds even remotely like this is intellectual poison and ends up in the mental asylum contemplating your own feces.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 08:40:03 2015 No.6844374

>>6841010
>Unfortunately, the brain itself is a mistake of evolution.

Well, if you subscribe to an eliminative materialist metaphysics then everything that occurs is a "mistake" because there is no end-directedness or teleology in things. Your writing that post was a "mistake".

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 08:56:46 2015 No.6844392 >>6837637 Hegel.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 09:12:07 2015 No.6844417 >>6838256 >there are people in the academia who are that stupid

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 09:15:12 2015 No.6844426 >>6844370 t: decadent anti-life

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 09:17:50 2015 No.6844432 >>6837858 nothin personnel.... kid...

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 09:26:25 2015 No.6844444 >>6841163 >'dinosaurs were a mistake t. god'. What does that 't.' mean?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 09:26:59 2015 No.6844445 >>6844444 OHHH SHIT NIGGA

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 09:32:20 2015 No.6844452 >>6837649 I have no idea what this means Also I had my existential crisis in middle school. Get on my level, plebs

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 09:33:20 2015 No.6844454 >>6844452 Bitches be needing to major in philosophy for that shit

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 09:34:38 2015 No.6844457 >>6844452 so did I. and so did like 50% of /lit/.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 09:36:30 2015 No.6844461 >>6844445 No seriously

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 10:27:37 2015 No.6844563 >>6844444 its finnish version of P S

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 11:02:54 2015 No.6844641 File: 1.06 MB, 1440x1442, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6837637 No because they eventually conclude with the discovery of the Noble Eightfold Path

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 11:40:01 2015 No.6844752 >>6844444 terveisin, finnish for 'regards'. as in how you would sign a letter. it's an /int/ meme that's also used to provide source/'authority' for example, an american says: "finland is warm" and then a fin says "finland is cold t. fin"

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 11:52:09 2015 No.6844800 >>6837637 Most do - this does not mean existential nihilism doesn't result in anything else.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:10:16 2015 No.6845131 >>6844370 >If you see anything like them you know to dismiss it because they are ultimately self-contradictory: only because they are bad formulas for a good idea.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:19:11 2015 No.6845162

>>6837996
You can't really be truly sceptical... If you were, you'd be like that character from The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy (I think it was God?) who just sat around talking to a table, because at any moment it might actually respond, seeing as true knowledge is unobtainable.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:23:30 2015 No.6845175 >>6844370 >Even if truth / reality exists, it cannot be known. All competent scientists/philosophers agree on this. Our perception of reality is and always will be subjective. You can never know anything about the world with absolute certainty.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:24:23 2015 No.6845178 >>6837637 I miss the old days when /lit/ would collectively laugh at babby's first existential crisis. >>6838323 This guy's got the right idea.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:29:21 2015 No.6845195

>>6845178
I despise people who always dismiss pessimism/nihilism as "edgy/childish/whatever". It's a perfectly valid philosophy.

The "laughing" you're refering to is just a dismissal of the idea by appealing to popular consensus. An idea being unpalatable to most people, being hostile to human life, does not in itself invalidate the idea. It deserves just as much respect as any other philosophical stance.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:40:49 2015 No.6845245 Not nihilism, but human insignificance. There is probably a reason and purpose for existence, but humans probably have no significant part in the story. We might even just be scenery.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:45:57 2015 No.6845263 >>6844452 >I was depressive pessimist in middle school thats not something to be proud of

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:48:38 2015 No.6845277 >>6845245 >there is probably a reason and purpose for existence how did you come to that conclusion?

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:51:15 2015 No.6845288

>>6845162
It does not follow that if true knowledge is unobtainable you should respond to that by acting in such a strange manner. There's no reason not to of course, but there is also no reason not to carry on as before and just live by common customs and such. There's no reason why you should act crazy as opposed as continuing with your normal habits.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:52:20 2015 No.6845293

>>6845245
I'm a hardline nihilist, so I believe that everything is inherently useless and stupid.

But, if you think that there is a reason/purpose for human existence, then how could you possibly conclude that we're insignificant? IF we're here for a reason, then we'd almost by necessity be the focal point of the universe, because we're the only matter capable of experiencing. The moon and stars by themselves are nothing. We are such extreme anomalies in an otherwise intellectually inert universe that we'd have to be significant, if we're here by design.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:53:43 2015 No.6845295 >>6845288 The whole point is that talking to a table wouldn't be crazy if you were truly sceptical. Without ignoring scepticism to a certain degree you can't function in the world.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:55:13 2015 No.6845302 >>6845293 > if you think that there is a reason/purpose for human existence I said existence, not human existence. Work on your reading comprehension before you try to speak with adults.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:56:18 2015 No.6845308 >>6840088 loved this post

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:57:04 2015 No.6845314 >>6845302 Are you telling me that humans don't exist? If humans exist, and there is a reason for existence, then there is a reason for human existence.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 13:58:51 2015 No.6845326 >>6845308 It's basically just a slight re-writing of Sam Harris' "I believe there is a diamond the size of a refrigerator in my backyard". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSjMoeY5uEc

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:04:26 2015 No.6845346

>>6845314
>but humans probably have no significant part in the story. We might even just be scenery.

I don't know how better I can explain it to you than to just repost my original post. Everything is there.

>IF we're here for a reason, then we'd almost by necessity be the focal point of the universe

Does not follow at all.

>We are such extreme anomalies in an otherwise intellectually inert universe that we'd have to be significant, if we're here by design.

There are almost certainly other intelligent beings in existence, and there is stuff going on outside of our universe. The players in this story are big.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:07:18 2015 No.6845365 >>6845326 >tfw accidentally thought the same thought as sam harris I feel slightly dirty.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:17:28 2015 No.6845405

>>6845295
It wouldn't be crazy, but you'd also have no reason to do it over doing what you'd normally do. It does not follow that scepticism leads to 'strange' (in the conventional sense) behaviour.

In fact, realising that you're on thin ice knowledge wise gives you all the more reason to stay on the trodden path that has seemed to work so far.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:19:35 2015 No.6845414
File: 226 KB, 1582x1362, Bildschirmfoto 2015-07-15 um 21.12.33.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6844339
>Is this available for a "Windows Computer"?
yes, it is freely available for windows

>OED_update_4-0-3.exe
ftp://oxford:guest@69.27.254.40/

here for the explanation of the shady business of Oxford publication
http://users.datarealm.com/xywwweb/oed.shtml#v4updates

>There are huge (640|617Mb) post-installation v4.0.0.3 updates for Macintosh | Windows (the latter a corrupt file, pursuant to OUP changes on 22 January 2013; use the OUP-USA Tech Support mirror instead). These refreshes of the code supply a new OED icon (a “carousel” of 20 books like the image on the CD case, except that one volume is open with a magnifying glass straddling the gutter – an amusing allusion to the generally-reviled two-volume “micrographic” Compact Version), and more importantly solve a few of the problems described below, albeit with a beefed-up SecuROM under Windows. Funny thing about this refresh: the Windows version calls itself “OED_update_4-0-3.exe” (655,401,876 bytes, MD5: 9fe0d6169a19738caf3fa8b99e76a632, downloaded 9 August 2010) but it doesn’t seem to require a previous installation, and it doesn’t seem to care whether you originally bought the full version or the upgrade — in fact, the freely-downloadable Windows update (but not the Mac update) is the complete v4 package (just as earlier SOED updates had been nearly complete save for a boot loader, pronunciation audio files, and some non-essential Help PDFs), and furthermore many correspondents confirm that if you use the SecuROM-free swhx.exe Screenweaver launcher described above, it doesn't ask that any disks be inserted to authenticate, and it functions pretty much like the Macintosh version: no copy protection or verification baggage, and no blacklisted apps either.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:20:45 2015 No.6845420 [DELETED]

>>6845414

OUP thus partially meets the licensing requirements of [L]GPL, which is no doubt gratifying to people committed to open source, but perhaps more important, a boon to the English-speaking world. Astonishing, actually, if you think about it... does OUP even fathom what they are doing here? Meeting a licensing requirement very very quietly (and thereby making the OED freely available), but in the subtlest possible fashion, recognizable only by technowhiz programmers... “If, on termination, [the OED_update_4-0-3.exe installer] tells you to reboot your machine, don’t do it. Instead, ... point your ‘OED v4.0’ shortcuts at swhx.exe instead of oed.exe, then test it. If you permit oed.exe to execute even once, you’re stuck with SecuROM forever” (or with the expunging rigmarole described above, which is no picnic – obviously, the smart thing to do is delete the factory file and then REName swhx.exe as oed.exe).

ALWAYS LAUNCH swhx.exe NOT oed.exe !!!!!!!!!

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:21:59 2015 No.6845425

>>6845414 (You)#

>OUP thus partially meets the licensing requirements of [L]GPL, which is no doubt gratifying to people committed to open source, but perhaps more important, a boon to the English-speaking world. Astonishing, actually, if you think about it... does OUP even fathom what they are doing here? Meeting a licensing requirement very very quietly (and thereby making the OED freely available), but in the subtlest possible fashion, recognizable only by technowhiz programmers... “If, on termination, [the OED_update_4-0-3.exe installer] tells you to reboot your machine, don’t do it. Instead, ... point your ‘OED v4.0’ shortcuts at swhx.exe instead of oed.exe, then test it. If you permit oed.exe to execute even once, you’re stuck with SecuROM forever” (or with the expunging rigmarole described above, which is no picnic – obviously, the smart thing to do is delete the factory file and then REName swhx.exe as oed.exe).

ALWAYS LAUNCH swhx.exe NOT oed.exe !!!!!!!!!

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:26:31 2015 No.6845437

>>6845277
Here's what I believe:

In the beginning, there was nothing, but since the state of nothing is impossible, at that very same moment, something was to exist. Of all the realities which could have sprang into existence, the one which was most perfect among them was in the most need of existing, and so it was the one which did.
Three important characteristics of this reality that made it the most perfect were it's ability to become aware of itself, to learn everything about itself, and to figure out an ultimate purpose for itself that it would be completely satisfied with.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:26:34 2015 No.6845438 File: 55 KB, 466x247, Alfred-Korzybski-Quotes-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6837996

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:27:56 2015 No.6845444
File: 27 KB, 300x300, 1422116246108.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6845175
>You can never know anything about the world with absolute certainty.
ONLY if you believe in certainty beforehand

the realists have always had a odd doctrine. Instead of acknowledging that reality is a phony concept, they become upset from the plurality of perspectives. There is no reason to be this upset, to the extend of creating some vapid reality, knowledge, and even worse, TRUE knowledge, which nobody knows anything about.

why does plurality bother people so much ?

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:32:53 2015 No.6845468

>>6845437
>Here's what I believe:
>In the beginning...

DOGMA I - METAPHYSICS #2, "COSMOLOGY" [a]
from The Honest Book of Truth
- I -

1. Before the beginning was the Nonexistent Chao, balanced in Oblivion by the Perfect Counterpushpull of the Hodge and the Podge.

2. Whereupon, by an Act of Happenstance, the Hodge began gradually to overpower the Podge -- and the Primal Chaos thereby came to be.

3. So in the beginning was the Primal Chaos, balanced on the Edge of Oblivion by the Perfect Counterpullpush of the Podge and the Hodge.

4. Whereupon, by the Law of Negative Reversal,[b] the Podge swiftly underpowered the Hodge and Everything broke loose.

5. And therein emerged the Active Force of Discord, the Subtle Manifestation of the Nonexistent Chao, to guide Everything along the Path back to Oblivion - that it might not become lost among Precepts of Order in the Region of Thud.

6. Forasmuch as it was Active, the Force of Discord entered the State of Confusion, wherein It copulated with the Queen and begat ERIS, Our Lady of Discord and Gross Manifestation of the Nonexistent Chao.

7. And under Eris Confusion became established, and was hence called Bureaucracy; while over Bureaucracy Eris became established, and was hence called Discordia.

8. By the by it came to pass that the Establishment of Bureaucracy perished in a paper shortage.

9. Thus it was, in accord with the Law of Laws.

10. During and after the Fall of the Establishment of Bureaucracy was the Aftermath, an Age of Disorder in which calculation, computations, and reckonings were put away by the Children of Eris in Acceptance and Preparation for the Return to Oblivion to be followed by a Repetition of the Universal Absurdity. Moreover, of Itself the Coming of Aftermath waseth a Resurrection of the Freedom-flowing Chaos. HAIL ERIS!

11. Herein was set into motion the Eristic Pattern, which would Repeat Itself Five Times Over Seventy-three Times, after which nothing would happen.

____________________________
[a] This doctrine should not be confused with DOGMA III - HISTORY #6, "HISTORIC CYCLES," which states that social progress occurs in five cycles, the first three ("The Tricycle") of which are THESIS, ANTITHESIS and PARENTHESIS; and the last two ("The Bicycle") of which are CONSTERNATION and MORAL WARPTITUDE.

[b] The LAW OF NEGATIVE REVERSAL states that if something does not happen then the exact opposite will happen, only in exactly the opposite manner from that in which it did not happen.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:34:33 2015 No.6845475 >>6845438 >we should arbitrarily accept things so that we may play thinking games Brotphilosoph mentality.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:34:38 2015 No.6845476

When we say "start with the Greeks" what we essentially mean is stay with the Greeks. Modern philosophy is garbage because it ends in navelgazing nonsense due to the idea that we only know the contents of our own minds.

c.f. >>6845175

Here's Aquinas debunking modern philosophy as a whole in 3 sentences:

>The intelligible species is to the intellect what the sensible image is to the sense. But the sensible image is not what is perceived, but rather that by which sense perceives. Therefore the intelligible species is not what is actually understood, but that by which the intellect understands.

In other words, we don't see our own senses, our senses are that by which we see actual things (material substances). We don't think our own thoughts, our thoughts are that by which we think about actual things (intelligible forms).

Again, compare >>6845175

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:36:10 2015 No.6845479
File: 557 KB, 900x900, 1433868574397.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6837637
to me the flaws in science are that it predicts only, that there is no uniquess of mathematical proofs (inside each models) and no proof of uniqueness of the models..
So basically, people think that
-science is about knowledge, while it is only about predictions (whereas their is no reason to call predicitons as knowledge about the reality (reality that we posit)
-even if we have a description of every phenomenon possible, some theory of everything, we would not have, apriori, the proof of the uniquess of the description (and since there can be several mathematical proofs for each amtheamtical theorem and since physics is about interpreting mathematics of the models, we have twice a plurality)

science is not able to prove its relevancy beyond the predictions more or less accurate.

Science cannot answer ''why do the human predictions matter ?''
I share the view of the exposition of discursive logic (I know nothing about this logic). To me, each person seem to have her world, her language, her logic, her intuitions, her truths [=obvious facts according to her and logically obvious [according to her] inferences of facts [typically via an induction]]

ex: ask people in the street what is justice/acting/orange juice, what is the appropriate behavior in such or such situation ?. we will end up with nearly as many definitions as there are asked individuals.
few people jump to the conclusion that because we obtain a plurality of responses, then justice/acting/orange juice do not exist.
Another group consisting a majority is that justice/acting/orange juice can still exist/make sense, even though we lack an agreement, amongst all the people, on what it is.
too few people however ask why does the question ''what is justice/acting/orange juice ?'' matters. A subject worthy of discussion by one person may not be worthy of discussion by another. many people do not care, do not know about such or such subject.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:36:22 2015 No.6845480 >>6845444 Christianity to be honest. When you get fed absolute truth for a few centuries anything less than that seems insufficient and scary in comparison.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:37:11 2015 No.6845483

>>6845479

then two worlds are confronted when two persons talk. they need a dictionary to understand themselves since too many times, they do not even agree about the definitions of the key words that they use, because the natural languages have vagueness and circularity and emphases.
this is seem a bit post-structuralist.

Evidently, a state and a national education will fix most of the experiences of the people belonging to the nation, but, for each individual, each definition of each word will have a fixed core [of elementary shared intuition] with an added nuance or subtlety that each individual adds from his proper experience.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:39:13 2015 No.6845489 >>6845475 >we should arbitrarily accept things He wrote an entire book an why you shouldn't arbitrarily accept things.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:40:32 2015 No.6845493

>>6845483
If, by some miracle, two persons have an efficient dictionary between their languages, that they agree on the definitions of the terms of one another, then it is not assured that they share the same ideas/ideology, the same course of actions and speeches.

Discourses seem pointless, beyond some entertainment. the lack of agreement is nor bad nor good, it is just is. this is lack is a problem in democracies where the question of knowledge is crucial as well as the principles that the people/institutions.governments choose in order to take actions in order to manage the people. But this is the problem of those who believe, beforehand, in the liberal democracy, in the republic.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:40:57 2015 No.6845496

>>6845175
>You can never know anything about the world with absolute certainty.
>You can never know anything about the world with absolute certainty.
>You can never know anything about the world with absolute certainty.
And you are absolutely certain about this?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:42:33 2015 No.6845499 File: 449 KB, 1968x1017, Discussive Logic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6845483 forgot the picture on discursive logic

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:48:41 2015 No.6845516

>>6845468
>>6845499
Another based Erisian.
-2-
A culture is a group of people with rather similar grids. Through a window we view chaos, and relate it to the points on our grid, and thereby understand it. The ORDER is in the GRID. That is the Aneristic Principle.

Western philosophy is traditionally concerned with contrasting one grid with another grid, and amending grids in hopes of finding a perfect one that will account for all reality and will, hence, (say unenlightened westerners) be True. This is illusory; it is what we Erisians call the ANERISTIC ILLUSION. Some grids can be more useful than others, some more beautiful than others, some more pleasant than others, etc., but none can be more True than any other.

DISORDER is simply unrelated information viewed through some particular grid. But, like "relation", no-relation is a concept. Male, like female, is an idea about sex. To say that male-ness is "absence of female-ness", or vice versa, is a matter of definition and metaphysically arbitrary. The artificial concept of no-relation is the ERISTIC PRINCIPLE.

The belief that "order is true" and disorder is false or somehow wrong, is the Aneristic Illusion. To say the same of disorder, is the ERISTIC ILLUSION.

The point is that (little-t) truth is a matter of definition relative to the grid one is using at the moment, and that (capital-T) Truth, metaphysical reality, is irrelevant to grids entirely. Pick a grid, and through it some chaos appears ordered and some appears disordered. Pick another grid, and the same chaos will appear differently ordered and disordered.

Reality is the original Rorschach.

Verily! So much for all that.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:52:38 2015 No.6845528 >>6845444 >ONLY if you believe in certainty beforehand Yes. Ofc. No reasonable person denies that there is an objective reality of some sort.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:53:38 2015 No.6845530 >>6845489 Does he provide criteria that overcome scepticism as to what we should accept and build on?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:53:45 2015 No.6845531 >>6845496 Could God make a rock so heavy he couldn't lift it? >hurr

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:55:50 2015 No.6845548 >>6845531 Of courshe, the Almighty transcends the bounds of logic. Contradiction isn't a problem to him.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:55:56 2015 No.6845549 >>6845531 >Could God make a rock so heavy he couldn't lift it? yes.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:57:23 2015 No.6845555 >>6837637 C O G I T O O G I T O

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 14:58:19 2015 No.6845559 >>6845528 >Yes. Ofc. No reasonable person denies that there is an objective reality of some sort. on the contrary, the reason does not lead to some objective reality it is pure belief to say that there is an objective reality

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:02:11 2015 No.6845576 >>6837637 No. If you read enough you'll end up loving life like Spinoza. :D

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:08:58 2015 No.6845596 >>6845516 well I concur indeed >>6845516 >Reality is the original Rorschach. what does this mean ? what is a Rorschach? to me the sole reality is the plurality of acts, speeches from humans, all that I get from my senses eventually.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:13:23 2015 No.6845614

>>6845559
I don't understand your reasoning. Something HAS to exist. I am experiencing something at this moment. I can't be sure what it is, as I'm just a subjective information processing system made of meat, but the fact that I am experiencing means that something exists. That something has to have certain qualities. We may never know them, but they have to be there.

That's how I see it. I'm interested in how you could arrive at any other conclusion.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:24:28 2015 No.6845650

>>6845614
>That's how I see it. I'm interested in how you could arrive at any other conclusion.
you talk about necessity here

>>6845614
>That something has to have certain qualities. We may never know them, but they have to be there.

like you said, you experience something, but going beyond this is not logical. it is your will to go beyond this in making it having qualities, attributes.

If I ask your motivations for this thesis
>That something has to have certain qualities

you will not be able to tell me anything. I will read that it is your intuition, But that you will not have a clue of why you believe what you believe.

the question then, to you, is where does this intuition come from ? why do you need it ? [like many people need some meanings in their lives, but they do not know what a meaning is, and have no clue on why they need it]

The overall task is really to think of something without attributes. it takes different forms in different works. For instance, we can only say that '' ''it'' exists'', we cannot go beyond the existence of ''it''. it has no attributes, no qualities, ''it'' is just is.

this is what you have with nibbana for the buddhist, or the daisen and so on. Pure being, with no qualities.

saying anything beyond that ''this thing is '' is already an error.

also, be careful in thinking in terms of necessity and sufficiency. what is necessary for a person is not for the other, what is sufficient for one person is not for the other and so on.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:28:46 2015 No.6845667

>>6845650
I speak of intuition, but it can also be about imagination.

In any case, the logic does not purport the idea of a reality.

the whole problem is again the one of knowledge. it is the oldest problem of the humanity. Is there knowledge/certainty beyond some direct perceptions ? and why does this question matter ?

can you not live without knowledge/certainty ?

the first task in the world is really to accept what you perceive, then change your self if you wish, but do not take your desires for the reality.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:29:12 2015 No.6845669

>>6837637
no

existential nihilism is a developmental stage

eventually you realize how pointless it is lol

what you basically see is that because there's no meanings handed out to you, you can construct them yourself, and they're as "valid" as the next one

tl;dr do what you wanna do

wow solving existential crises is so deep. of course if you're ego-invested in being a depressed snowflake faget you will have trouble getting past it

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:32:24 2015 No.6845678

>>6845669
If we're ego-invested then how do we get the fuck out

I've been depressed the past three years of my life, seen many doctors, been on meds, am seeking psychotherapy. The reaction I get from some professionals and friends about this is really startling and I think its made me as you say, ego-invested.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:32:39 2015 No.6845681 >>6845667 >but do not take your desires for the reality. to take your desires for the reality leads to /insatisfaction/unhappiness/suffering [dukka for the buddhist]

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:45:45 2015 No.6845729

>>6845650
>I will read that it is your intuition

Then you have already granted that intuition exists. Which is what I'm talking about when I say subjective experience. SOMETHING exists, otherwise there would be no "intuition" or "subjective experience".

It seems nonsensical to say that nothing exists.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:46:35 2015 No.6845732 >>6845669 >what you basically see is that because there's no meanings handed out to you, you can construct them yourself, and they're as "valid" as the next one You don't. You just forego meaning altogether.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:49:28 2015 No.6845745

>>6845669
>and they're as "valid" as the next one

Which means that there is no meaning. Any meaning by definition is invalid. Being alive is stupid. We're just scrambling around trying to find something to hold on to, moving from one goal to the next for no reason.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 15:56:47 2015 No.6845778

>>6845678
I'm no shrink

anyway what do you do with your time? what you want to do with it but can't?

>>6845732
not really, its a "synthesis" of meanings and meaninglessness. meanings have no value but you realize pure nihilism gets you nowhere. so you take something to give shapes to your internal life

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 16:01:57 2015 No.6845795

>>6845745
>We're just scrambling around trying to find something to hold on to, moving from one goal to the next for no reason

and what's wrong with that? do you need some clearly spelled out galactic eternal goal to guide you?

this goes back to fear of death. if you were immortal you'd have no problem with changing goals constantly, but with death on the horizon you're afraid of wasting time so you lookout for these grand truths that don't exist, get lost, and waste more time than you ever would have had you not gotten into this philosophical musing

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 16:15:40 2015 No.6845834 >>6837637 Yes. Everything leads to "lol, well just do what you want in life, nothing matters". That's it.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 16:27:56 2015 No.6845871

Look, I'd consider myself a realist, alright? But in philosophical terms I'm what's called a pessimist... I think human consciousness is a tragic misstep in evolution. We became too self-aware. Nature created an aspect of nature separate from itself - we are creatures that should not exist by natural law... We are things that labor under the illusion of having a self, that accretion of sensory experience and feelings, programmed with total assurance that we are each somebody, when in fact everbody's nobody... I think the honorable thing for our species to do is to deny our programming. Stop reproducing, walk hand in hand into extinction - one last midnight, brothers and sisters opting out of a raw deal.

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 16:56:36 2015 No.6845982

>>6845795
Not really. I have no fear of death. Immortality is literally my worst nightmare. My biggest fear is that there is an afterlife.

It's not really the lack of "meaning" -- the abscence of some grand cosmic purpose -- that bothers me. It's the moving from goal to goal, without an end, constantly climbing one hill thinking this time it'll be different, only to find that the accomplishment is transient, that now I'll have to climb the next hill, never finding anything that justifies life. No state can be reached that's good enough, we're always looking for the next fix. Just distracting ourselves from the uselessness of it all. Like one of those truths in buddhism; life is suffering (Bad translation, just means something like dissatisfaction). A retarded treadmill that leads nowhere.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 17:06:06 2015 No.6846029 >>6837653 go to bed

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 17:07:10 2015 No.6846033 >>6837924 >claims nihilism is the "death of all rationality and philosophy" without explaining why >good grades at school >correct opinions/truthful Wow

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 17:16:21 2015 No.6846075
File: 775 KB, 715x535, 1431553954067.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I think it's unlikely to not go through it at least once after you start to study some philosophy.
Then it's like a ground state, you can either sit down there, jump up and down, or maybe get yourself the right tools to build either a ladder or maybe even a rocket.
For some I suppose finding these tools can be a hard task and might make you want to sit a lot.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 17:19:45 2015 No.6846088 >>6841045 >calling yourself a nihilist in the first place anywhere but inside your head

Anonymous Sat Jul 18 17:25:26 2015 No.6846116

>>6846088
>best friend and I studied philosophy, different unis but very similar courses
>independently come tot he conclusion that nihilism is basically right
>meet up whenever we can, get drunk, take MXP and talk about philosophy, particularly nihilism, and literature
>completely deny any kind of nihilism in public because most people, through no fault of their own of course, simply don't fully understand it
>too much hassle
what you say is true, you should only really call yourself something if the people you're around understand it or ask for a detailed explanation otherwise it's too much shit to deal with

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 18:09:47 2015 No.6846344 >>6838323 >tfw /lit/ is plagued with shitty trips

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 18:18:06 2015 No.6846376 >>6846116 How long can you talk about nihilism? There's not much to say.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jul 18 23:52:58 2015 No.6847741 >>6845982 congrats, you have understood one of the buddhist Three Characteristics, Impermanence And you mentioned dissatisfaction too. What you need to understand is the third one, No-Self, so you won't take all this so personally

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 00:23:44 2015 No.6847847 >>6847741 when I die, who will be left to experience reality?

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 01:22:21 2015 No.6848066 >>6847847 your cat

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 02:20:32 2015 No.6848216 File: 971 KB, 2314x8185, to perceive, to predict and to know.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6837637 I wrote again and corrected the thing

Anonymous Sun Jul 19 02:32:54 2015 No.6848246

>>6845729
>>Then you have already granted that intuition exists.
no, I said that I will read that you will claim that you motivate that something exists based on some intuition or imagination.

What exists to me is, in realist terms since the natural language is quite realist, whatever goes through my senses.
In terms which do not presuppose realism, a dichotomy object-subject, I can say that I am whatever I feel, at least until I use a bit of reflexivity to detach myself from my senses and thoughts, since I do not control them and worse, sometimes they are not pleasant, these two situation leading to an unsatisfaction.

intuition does not exist. Intuition towards what from whom ? I surely have no clue what your intuition feels like.

>>6845729
>It seems nonsensical to say that nothing exists.
well perhaps, if you think that this is wrong/bad/a mistake, then you must motivate why you care about the reason in the first place

Anonymous Sun Jul 19 04:38:16 2015 No.6848474
File: 3 KB, 325x306, inkblot2.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6845596
>>Reality is the original Rorschach.
>what does this mean ? what is a Rorschach?

It's a psychological test where the subject looks at an inkblot and describes what he sees.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 04:43:42 2015 No.6848487 All that exists is the all-seeing-I, the witness, the atman, the self of each living creature being equivalent to the brahman. Read the upanishads.

>>	ually Sun Jul 19 05:00:08 2015 No.6848530 >>6848487 Where is your atman when you are sleeping or in anesthesia? Consciousness can't be the self because that too is impermanent. Buddha still the greatest wiseman ever.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 05:18:26 2015 No.6848561 >>6837979 >we >WE >W >E Fuck off.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 05:26:01 2015 No.6848570 >>6837858 Go hang yourself fool

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 10:10:46 2015 No.6849081 >>6848474 mirrored image of willy wonka bending over an oompa loompa to fuck him in the ass

Anonymous Sun Jul 19 17:58:01 2015 No.6850585

>>6837637

The intellectually honest ones do, yes. Because that's how the world works. However, there are some significant (albeit delusional/intellectually dishonest) alternatives.

The first one is the hedonism for those who can realize it, as this guy >>6837653 correctly points out. The alternative is some sort of religion or spirituality, which the meme-conservative-columnist (someone is going to shit on me for invoking him, but he has interesting ideas) David Brooks has been going on about for a few years now.

It bears mentioning that Brooks writes for the New York Times, and New York is filled with the self-actualized rich hedonist types already mentioned, so he has some idea of how life is for those types. But plenty of people even become bored with this dissipation after a while (Brooks mentioned on the radio some old metaphor/purported historical fact about how in ancient rich cities, people would eventually get bored of life and slowly trickle out of the cities to just go live on a hill somewhere, maybe with a wife, and farm/contemplate life or somesuch. In his telling, he described this disaffection to a room full of undergraduates, and their eyes widened because they actually understood what Brooks was referring to).

Neither of those is the full picture, however. No god, nothing matters, life's a bitch and then you die. *tips* :^)

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 18:15:18 2015 No.6850634 >>6845476 underrated post

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 18:22:05 2015 No.6850659 >>6850585 This is really interesting. Good entry point for Brooks?

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 19:54:49 2015 No.6851027 >>6850659 The NYT editorial page, lol. I've never read a book of his.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 20:02:10 2015 No.6851056 >>6851027 he's been shilling it on his recent columns. some How to Have Values philosophy/self help shit.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 21:12:27 2015 No.6851274 >>6837637 i have a bunch of friends who are doing their masters in philosophy atm who are all happy, well-rounded, overall good people. I think existential nihilism results from an inclination towards existential nihilism.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 22:07:36 2015 No.6851491 >>6851274 >doing their masters in philosophy atm who are all happy, well-rounded, overall good people. That's because they haven't into the real world yet, just wait.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jul 19 22:10:22 2015 No.6851501 >>6837653 /thread

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 20 03:55:28 2015 No.6852474 >>6844452 gj so did anyone else who matured at an average rate.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 20 03:58:47 2015 No.6852478 >>6837637 I know one Philosophy teacher, doctor thereof, he's a depressive shutin who only has his cats. He's also Red as hell, but I don't exactly count that as a fault.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 20 04:06:16 2015 No.6852499 >>6852478 >Red erythromania, you scare him

Anonymous Mon Jul 20 04:10:23 2015 No.6852508
File: 237 KB, 1550x875, la-grande-bellezza.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6850585
>It bears mentioning that Brooks writes for the New York Times, and New York is filled with the self-actualized rich hedonist types already mentioned, so he has some idea of how life is for those types. But plenty of people even become bored with this dissipation after a while (Brooks mentioned on the radio some old metaphor/purported historical fact about how in ancient rich cities, people would eventually get bored of life and slowly trickle out of the cities to just go live on a hill somewhere, maybe with a wife, and farm/contemplate life or somesuch. In his telling, he described this disaffection to a room full of undergraduates, and their eyes widened because they actually understood what Brooks was referring to).
this is the cliché that indeed rich people live on.

this film is just the same

most people need to go through experiences to understand something, since most people do not trust their reason [when they take the time to reason]

Anonymous Mon Jul 20 06:19:59 2015 No.6852791

>>6852508
reminds me of siddhartha needing to become rich to realize he was still just a sad cunt. You're right though, how many men strive to get women and have sex with as many as possible etc because it;'s so glorified? Then after a few fucks it becomes the norm and its boring again. I think that's the kicker, whatever it is you eventually want more as is human nature

Anonymous Mon Jul 20 09:47:45 2015 No.6853316

>>6846376
Kinda surprised this thread is still up. I suppose there isn't much to say that hasn't been said already, mostly we're just sitting there thinking up new ways to emphasise how nothing means anything, or how pointless things really are and how both of those things contrast with society in general which puts meaning on the most absurd or mechanical processes.

That's if there's just the two of us though. It's a sort of cathartic blissful depressive state we find ourselves in. One time there was another of our friends with us and we tried to explain the tractatus while drunk.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 20 10:04:18 2015 No.6853359 >>6852478 Well, you should. /lit/ in general is at fault in that its userbase frequently (still) accepts Marxism as a serious category of human thought.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 20 10:18:12 2015 No.6853397 >>6845516 >Erisian discordianism isn't real philosophy

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature