2017-04-25 at 11:45 PM UTC
In my Shitfucking opinion, the hard problem of conciousness is what alot of philosophy is really about.
Philosophy is a dead field.
2017-04-27 at 10:03 PM UTC
its about people making untestable theories on things they can't understand, generally.
2017-04-27 at 10:13 PM UTC
Trianglism is a philosophy
2017-04-27 at 10:19 PM UTC
Thats what people say about atheism.
2017-04-28 at 12:15 AM UTC
We're all links in the chain of The Wrecking Ball.
2017-05-14 at 10:10 PM UTC
Zanick
motherfucker
[my p.a. supernal goa]
Plato would be the obvious answer
2017-05-14 at 10:11 PM UTC
The true nature of shapes.
2017-05-14 at 10:13 PM UTC
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2017-05-14 at 10:14 PM UTC
philosophy is supposed to come back to the meaning of significance. in practice, it rarely does, because most philosophers don't live lives of necessity.
2017-05-15 at 2:02 AM UTC
I suppose that ultimately it's about the nature of existence. But that isn't really an answer because it's so fucking vague and covers so many things.
So I guess the problems of identity and consciousness are the hardest to crack, and most important.
I've posted this multiple times before, but I really like this quote by Camus:
“There is but one truly serious philosophical problem and that is suicide. Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of philosophy. All the rest — whether or not the world has three dimensions, whether the mind has nine or twelve categories — comes afterwards. These are games; one must first answer.”
Why should I continue to exist? That may be the foundational problem in philosophy, and the most practical one, at its core, as well.
Let me tell you from personal experience: The purpose of existentialism is not to make yourself happy or feel better about life, it's about understanding the nature of existence. You can't assume that the answers you find are ones that are going to make you happy. Some people cannot come to terms with the things they come to realize about life and you can literally drive yourself insane by delving too deep into it.
I can almost guarantee you that engaging in serious, deep, study of it isn't going to make you happier or make your life feel more meaningful, unless you buy into/fall for the pop-philosophy feel-good garbage.
The way I would describe why some people make this their profession is that there's this profound pathological desire, strong neurotic and obsessive compulsive traits, that just drive some people to an extreme level of truth seeking.
An analogy would be, why do some people enjoy horror so much? Why on earth would someone enjoy being terrified, viewing or reading profoundly disturbing works?
Well, related to the above, it's almost as if you have this unstoppable drive to keep digging beneath the surface, to discover the truth, and no matter how bad it gets you just keep going, you've invested so much time, and time/investment can have nothing to do with it, but at some point it can become this morbid curiosity where you're just absolutely fascinated by how unbelievably fucked up simply existing is and almost want to discover just how bad the story gets, just how bad it really is.
Then there can be a level where the absurdity and grotesqueness is so extreme that it breaks through to the other end and there's a sense of a profound beauty to it, to simply having gained understanding of things that were of profound importance to you.
2017-05-15 at 2:13 AM UTC
What "serious, deep, study" of existentialism have you done Malice?
2017-05-15 at 2:35 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny
What "serious, deep, study" of existentialism have you done Malice?
You are smarter and far more well read than me, in part because of your privileged life. I readily admit I am not worthy of debating with you, I have no formal education, and you completely outclass me when it comes to proper argumentation.
Lanny, attempting to debate with you annoys the hell out of me. It's not quite an insult, our styles are just so divergent that I cannot handle trying to have a debate with you, even if you may be right. It's like when it comes to some subjects your cognitive style is just insanely Aspergergic, far worse than mine. We are not compatible.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
