User Controls
should lanny stop pretending to be an important philosopher
-
2018-11-10 at 8:30 AM UTCOn the one hand, discussing and hashing out our ideas in a public forum is a time-honored philosophical tradition, and one which I am very fond of.
On the other hand, it's also just a big ole intellectual wankfest, which I'm not so fond of.
Also: what does it even mean to "pretend" to be a philosopher? Does philosophy require some kind of degree? Documentation? Are you not a philosopher until you have a PhD? Surely all it takes to be a philosopher is a passion for pondering/love of thought. Neh? -
2018-11-10 at 8:35 AM UTC
-
2018-11-10 at 8:39 AM UTCDiogenes was the one taking the picture
-
2018-11-10 at 8:42 AM UTC
Originally posted by HTS On the one hand, discussing and hashing out our ideas in a public forum is a time-honored philosophical tradition, and one which I am very fond of.
On the other hand, it's also just a big ole intellectual wankfest, which I'm not so fond of.
Also: what does it even mean to "pretend" to be a philosopher? Does philosophy require some kind of degree? Documentation? Are you not a philosopher until you have a PhD? Surely all it takes to be a philosopher is a passion for pondering/love of thought. Neh?
you just gotta be at philosophizing -
2018-11-10 at 9:44 AM UTCfuck this site
i guess lanny has wetbrain and his conceptualizations of reality are irredeemable from the drunken thought loops of dead greek men
when i was 12 i thought this community was brilliant but my brain grew and the admins got progressively stupider. then the DH basic bitches invaded and now its just a dead circlejerk for pretentious retards + twitter for sluts -
2018-11-10 at 9:45 AM UTC
Originally posted by HTS Also: what does it even mean to "pretend" to be a philosopher? Does philosophy require some kind of degree? Documentation? Are you not a philosopher until you have a PhD? Surely all it takes to be a philosopher is a passion for pondering/love of thought. Neh?
a genuine philosopher comes up with his own genuine philosophy himself while showering or masturbating or while doing any other mundane activities
while immitation philosopher did none of that but instead just goes to the library or the internet to tar himself and roll around in the thoughts and philosophies of other dead people that came before him and sometimes he will also act like a mother bird and slurping up all them thoughts of great thinkers before regurgigating them into the mouths of young and impressionable birdlings ....
i think like that. -
2018-11-10 at 9:46 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Socrates is obviously the one on his back. Plato is the one sucking dick, representing his unending desire to pull on Socrate's skin and fellate his persona, if not his philosophy. The one kissing him is Aristotle both on account of him being the most attractive of the bunch and also because he actually loves Socrates and his philosophy, not just his image (phallus), and is the true successor to the western philosophical tradition.
interesting. -
2018-11-10 at 9:50 AM UTC
Originally posted by Glokula's Homabla fuck this site
i guess lanny has wetbrain and his conceptualizations of reality are irredeemable from the drunken thought loops of dead greek men
when i was 12 i thought this community was brilliant but my brain grew and the admins got progressively stupider. then the DH basic bitches invaded and now its just a dead circlejerk for pretentious retards + twitter for sluts
when you were 12 you were a virgin. -
2018-11-10 at 11:42 AM UTCAnd he still is, do something about it vinny.
-
2018-11-10 at 4:48 PM UTC
Originally posted by HTS On the one hand, discussing and hashing out our ideas in a public forum is a time-honored philosophical tradition, and one which I am very fond of.
On the other hand, it's also just a big ole intellectual wankfest, which I'm not so fond of.
Also: what does it even mean to "pretend" to be a philosopher? Does philosophy require some kind of degree? Documentation? Are you not a philosopher until you have a PhD? Surely all it takes to be a philosopher is a passion for pondering/love of thought. Neh?
Well, technically you're a plumber if you plunge your toilet or hook up a few pipes and gaskets.
You're also technically a chef if you can follow a recipe and prepare a Thanksgiving dinner for a whole host of people.
You might even say you're a mathmetician if you can count from 1 to 2.
It's all a matter of degree.
And the word degree is unexpectedly quite relevant to make this point.
Officially speaking, there are certifications/credentials one must accumulate in order to truly and officially proclaim to be a philosopher, plumber, mathematician, chef, etc.
It's all about the standardization and academic measurement that comes with formal education.
I could fancy myself a philosopher all I want, because I do read a lot of the traditional thinkers, and heck, I even have a minor in philosophy, so I have the teeniest morsel of evidence to substantiate the validity of my "philosopher" status (truly the bare minimum though).
I don't think anyone is really all that pretentious enough to simply tune out any opinion from an Unofficial Philosopher TM outright merely because of the source, because that is one of the most fundamental logical fallacies - the Ad Hominem attack (attacking the arguer, not the argument itself).
With all that being said, though, would you be more likely to trust a philosopher with a PhD over some rambling NIS poster, assuming the arguments proposed aren't uncontroversial enough to make a judgment on their claims alone?
Are you also willing to let the chef with toaster experience to cook for you, or the handyman with but a wrench and plunger on his tool belt? -
2018-11-10 at 4:59 PM UTC
Originally posted by gadzooks Well, technically you're a plumber if you plunge your toilet or hook up a few pipes and gaskets.
You're also technically a chef if you can follow a recipe and prepare a Thanksgiving dinner for a whole host of people.
You might even say you're a mathmetician if you can count from 1 to 2.
It's all a matter of degree.
And the word degree is unexpectedly quite relevant to make this point.
Officially speaking, there are certifications/credentials one must accumulate in order to truly and officially proclaim to be a philosopher, plumber, mathematician, chef, etc.
It's all about the standardization and academic measurement that comes with formal education.
I could fancy myself a philosopher all I want, because I do read a lot of the traditional thinkers, and heck, I even have a minor in philosophy, so I have the teeniest morsel of evidence to substantiate the validity of my "philosopher" status (truly the bare minimum though).
I don't think anyone is really all that pretentious enough to simply tune out any opinion from an Unofficial Philosopher TM outright merely because of the source, because that is one of the most fundamental logical fallacies - the Ad Hominem attack (attacking the arguer, not the argument itself).
With all that being said, though, would you be more likely to trust a philosopher with a PhD over some rambling NIS poster, assuming the arguments proposed aren't uncontroversial enough to make a judgment on their claims alone?
Are you also willing to let the chef with toaster experience to cook for you, or the handyman with but a wrench and plunger on his tool belt?
none of the old and dead philosophers were certified philosophers. -
2018-11-10 at 5:10 PM UTC
-
2018-11-10 at 5:17 PM UTCriders of a cock ride together.
-
2018-11-10 at 5:27 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny none of the old and dead philosophers were certified philosophers.
Actually, since the days of Plato, there was a rigorous curriculum in place, with accolades and nominative titles of respect given to graduates.
But you do raise a good point that it always wasnt quite as formal as it is now.
Socrates certainly didn't enroll in Philosophy 101 only to be stuck sitting next Diogenes of Sinope, known for his lack of hygiene. -
2018-11-10 at 5:32 PM UTC
-
2018-11-10 at 5:38 PM UTC
-
2018-11-10 at 5:40 PM UTC
-
2018-11-10 at 10:08 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Socrates is obviously the one on his back. Plato is the one sucking dick, representing his unending desire to pull on Socrate's skin and fellate his persona, if not his philosophy. The one kissing him is Aristotle both on account of him being the most attractive of the bunch and also because he actually loves Socrates and his philosophy, not just his image (phallus), and is the true successor to the western philosophical tradition.
Unrelated Related
One of the 5 main methods of study for the art of Acting is "Socratic Style Read". a few years back I took about 2 years of SAG-Aftra level class. don't ask me how the fuck I got in with SAG members.. I just never told them I was or wasn't. was offered to get into the union. declined. nearly 4k
Whohoo
It suggest that Socrates would go into deep methods of thought and was a huge pause talker while reciprocating a conversation yet would unload on your ass with great passionate words of wisdom.
or not, I just wanted to sound fanciful -
2018-11-10 at 11:06 PM UTC
Originally posted by gadzooks Actually, since the days of Plato, there was a rigorous curriculum in place, with accolades and nominative titles of respect given to graduates.
But you do raise a good point that it always wasnt quite as formal as it is now.
Socrates certainly didn't enroll in Philosophy 101 only to be stuck sitting next Diogenes of Sinope, known for his lack of hygiene.
They were all kind of shitty philosophers tbh. -
2018-11-11 at 12 AM UTC
Originally posted by GGG They were all kind of shitty philosophers tbh.
If you mean literally, you might be onto something, since they didn't exactly have toilet paper back then, and Diogenes, well, he literally lived like a dog.
But if you mean in terms of their ideas, I'd care to hear your elaborations?
They advanced Western thinking with incredible haste.
