-  [WT]  [PS]  [Home] [Manage]

  1.   (new thread)
  2. [ No File]
  3. (for post and file deletion)
/phi/ - Philosophy
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 1000 KB.
  • Images greater than 200x200 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 475 unique user posts. View catalog

  • Blotter updated: 2011-01-12 Show/Hide Show All

There's a new /777/ up, it's /selfhelp/ - You're Pathetic, We're Pathetic, We Can Do This! Check it out. Suggest new /777/s here.

Movies & TV 24/7 via Channel7: Web Player, .m3u file. Music via Radio7: Web Player, .m3u file.

WebM is now available sitewide! Please check this thread for more info.

Anonymous ## Mod ## 11/10/26(Wed)10:01 No. 3905 ID: 4c1a8e [Reply] Stickied
3905

File 13196161034.jpg - (71.49KB , 256x256 , slow.jpg )

For growing and shit or whatever I present to you:

THE BIG STICKIED THREAD OF PHILOSOPHY RESOURCES



Put in whatever resources that fit in here, whether it's from wikipedia, youtube, some university, or where ever. Just remember to keep it within the board's guidelines and rules.
Use it or lose it, faggots.


31 posts and 3 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Anonymous 15/04/21(Tue)06:34 No. 12160 ID: 86e709

>>11988
The best christian philosopher in the world. Cool. Ranks him right up there with the best zoroastrian philosopher in the world and the best mithraic philosopher in the world. Great for adherents of those cults, but pretty weak shit outside them.




Anonymous ## Mod ## 12/02/02(Thu)05:26 No. 5920 ID: 4fb7fa [Reply] [First 100 posts] [Last 50 posts] Stickied
5920

File 132815678430.jpg - (161.57KB , 500x452 , 6904084_Untitled-2.jpg )

This thread is for discussion of the validity of religion(s) and arguments for and against the existence of god/gods.

Any other new posts about this subject will be deleted, or locked and referred to this one.

New threads about religious concepts that play inside their own ruleset are allowed, and we kindly ask that you refrain from turning those well meaning threads into arguments about religion as a whole.


307 posts and 18 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Anonymous 15/04/17(Fri)22:55 No. 12131 ID: 31099f

>It implies you don't know what you believe.

It can easily imply that you belief, that you do not know whether X exists.


>"Do you live your life with the assumption that God(s) exists?"

I live with the assumption that I do not know whether God(s) exists.


I understand that it's very unlikely that some main stream religion is completely right. But the concept of God is much wider used than just for that purpose. There might be some form of intelligence related to our origin, there might not be. I don't have any evidence, so I don't know.


Maybe people are so pressured to hear an agnostic say he thinks one way or another, is due to the underlying reasoning that this influence some type of black and white moral behavior. But it doesn't. You don't need to be so deterministic to decide what you think is right.




READ THIS BEFORE POSTING YOU PILE OF FAGGOTS Anonymous ## Mod ## 11/09/09(Fri)04:51 No. 2371 ID: 175f07 [Reply] Locked Stickied
2371

File 131553668277.jpg - (24.94KB , 400x615 , formalblacktie2.jpg )

We interrupt your scheduled bickering for this important announcement: Understanding /phi/

  • What this board is:
    • A place to discuss epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and logic, in a general sense, or in an applied sense (in sex, science, vidya, your mother).
    • A place where not only is being a pretentious, hubristic dickhead is allowed, but is considered the norm.
  • What this board is not:
    • It is not /b/, /x/, or /rnb/.
    • A place to spew incoherent nonsense and verbal diarrhea.
    • A place to make claims with no justifications (and "because I say so" or "because you're gay" isn't a justification).
    • A place where the global rules do not apply.
An inability to follow these conventions will result in a warning!
Repeat offenders will be banned!


>>
Anonymous ## Mod ## 11/12/04(Sun)05:06 No. 4980 ID: 4c1a8e

Dear faggots,
I shouldn't have to remind you, but if someone is posting something against the rules, please report it.

If you don't know how to report a post, please see our super-sugoi FAQ section on the front page.

Thank you for your co-operation.
-7chan




Anonymous 15/04/19(Sun)10:27 No. 12141 ID: 1b02b6 [Reply]
12141

File 14294320377.png - (132.73KB , 1025x698 , sdfsdfsdfsdf.png )

I'm looking for people who will toss aside the rash decision making for just this thread and calm down. Clear your mind.

In inquiring for your thoughts, it is simply to affirm a possibility that it may be true. I've taken into account more times than I can conceive that this is entirely delusional and is nothing more than a product of my distaste for the world. I wouldn't necessarily say that I'm a conspiracy theorist in that I actually care that the things that are thought are happening--it simply doesn't concern me. What concerns me is the truth; trying to find a reason that actually makes sense of and explains why the great, great, great majority are behaving the way they are. You could argue that this could/should go to /x/, but because my intent is to provoke more thought than immediate dismissal and laughter as is generally thought towards those who advocate conspiracy theories, I think that it is more appropriate here.

The premise begins on the idea that people can be easily manipulated: Take, for example, Hitler. He promoted his propaganda to an enormous group of people and won their personal assent and thus belief from his rhetoric. He even stated himself, "By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.", and, "If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.". This is true and propagates through every aspect of humanistic behaviour. This is by no means intended to offend, but an example is the folks of western society (or any society for that matter) who believe that their social perception of reality is the only possible one because that is all they know/have been taught/ have been raised to believe. Tell a woman you find unattractive that she is beautiful enough, and despite the social norms that predominate that culture to suggest otherwise, she will start to consider this proposition and start to believe it--gaining confidence. Have someone influential like Obama say, "____ are trying to take over the world, we need to act now", and just like in the case of Hitler, the vote would most likely be in favour of Obama's declaration and a general agreement would be made despite the lack of evidence to support his claim.

With this said, why is it so necessary to immediately deny the proposition that there may exist a controlling body/force that guides the global decision-making by rhetorical, "clue-like" means? The strangest idea to me is the idea that most humans today put a stigma on the things that are naturally pleasurable, like sex (when naturally, someone coming up on the street and touching you should be exciting, as they are stimulating your genitalia by their personal acknowledgement of it and the rubbing of their hand up against it). The only thing that I know does this is the bible. And such a rhet Message too long. Click here to view the full text.


10 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Anonymous 15/04/21(Tue)00:16 No. 12159 ID: d2ef46

>>12157

Look man if you just wanna talk about the bible I walked into the wrong thread. And answered your question without even touching that shit.

I don't talk about religion because I don't care about it. If it's your thing that's cool but we gotta get it straight that I'm here to discuss your question, not the bible.


>>
Anonymous 15/04/26(Sun)02:46 No. 12164 ID: 44de9e

>>12158
>What's really hard about this is that there is no way to convince you that I'm on a different plane than you other than to have you just think I'm insane and incoherent.

You are indeed on a different plane, a lower one. This is my theory regarding autistic's brain function: us normals are tended to by higher beings on higher planes as though we're thoughless and blind morons, just as we have to care for and guide your kind.
This isn't falsifiable, but I have faith in my view because I was right about toxoplasmosis causing insanity and a few other 'lucky' guesses.


>>
Anonymous 15/04/26(Sun)03:02 No. 12166 ID: 44de9e
12166

File 143001013816.jpg - (92.79KB , 557x495 , 13991052609.jpg )

>>12164
As an addendum I need to add: go outside OP, start talking to real people. You can't insulate yourself online because it makes you go peculiar. You seem personally oblivious to what you've become while everyone tries to point it out to you.
The reason people attack you is because we cannot believe someone can be so forcefully stupid and irrational: I touched a woman without consent, she flipped her shit. Natural assumption: you creeped her the fuck out because you violated a social norm that has been ingrained and selected throughout our evolutionary history, and you are an aberration that must learn what comes to us instinctively.
If we grew these instincts then they served us well in our species' infancy. It's not something to be discarded on your whim because you assume you are higher-functioning than others - it is an important part of societal cohesion because violating people's space, property, harming them, whatever is not the route to mutual prosperity. We all understand this without a thought, but you have difficulty. This is not some mass-conspiracy against you. You are not the victim of the human race. Buck up and rejoin the race, or be honest about it and say 'I don't fit in, and lack the will to try'.




Anonymous 14/11/21(Fri)23:19 No. 11896 ID: cc6b6b [Reply]
11896

File 141660837828.jpg - (149.71KB , 1280x800 , 1332533281340.jpg )

Let's get down to it.

What is the meaning of life?


32 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Anonymous 15/04/18(Sat)01:38 No. 12137 ID: 43f5da
12137

File 142931393982.jpg - (675.80KB , 1420x968 , Dunno.jpg )

>>11896
in life there is no meaning,
however, each body that holds life and therefore lives, should act to the signals it gives to the consciousness of the self.
This does not mean one should do whatever it desires, for some desires can have negative consequences. It does mean, do what thou wilt, for love is the law of nature.
One does not want to get killed by its enemy, so riding a bike on the highway at 700 miles an hour is not a smart thing to do. Even fucking around, and having as many kids as possible can come out of that love-making is not very smart. Those kids want food and pleasure some day and the more kids you make, the less there will be left for oneself.

Live the good life, enjoy the fine things, discover the intelligent knowledge, so one becomes wiser, and stronger to enjoy life more, and die without remorse.

That should be a good start to enjoy the strangest thing in the cosmos, life.


>>
Anonymous 15/04/25(Sat)08:11 No. 12163 ID: ed9b15

To prepare for the afterlife


>>
Anonymous 15/04/26(Sun)02:51 No. 12165 ID: 44de9e

I can't figure it out. Personal ambition might be the most honest guide to the everyman. As for the final purpose I don't think it's 'nothing', but it is paradoxical and impossible to reason out due to our dimensional constraints. What I'm getting at is a chicken or the egg scenario where God creates Man, or Man 'creates' God, which doesn't make sense because in those higher dimensions time isn't applicable to him. It hurts brain to think.




Anonymous 15/03/21(Sat)00:47 No. 12097 ID: 1df3c1 [Reply]
12097

File 142689522274.jpg - (22.82KB , 284x177 , images.jpg )

Do you, my fellow philosophers, think suicide and anorexia are a result of north american consumerism and the culture of always wanting to be better, or are just diseases that people are born with?


>>
Anonymous 15/04/17(Fri)23:19 No. 12134 ID: 31099f

>>12108

There is no reason for life, but the experience of life itself.


>>
Anonymous 15/04/23(Thu)05:07 No. 12162 ID: 86e709
12162

File 142975847927.jpg - (155.81KB , 775x551 , IMG_1030.jpg )

I think, that the amount of movies that revolve around solitary hero worship saving the world by shooting and exploding their way out of every situation, indicates that USicans really just want to be sheep. This idea that some militant ubermensch lone operator is going to come out of nowhere to save you and your civilization from consequence and let you go on with your lives as is so you never have to lift a fucking finger to take the risk of changing how you live your shitty little lives, seems to be the #1 thing people want to see when they watch films and read books and comics and go to church.


I wouldn't care at all, and barely do, but for the fact that at this point, mankind is too big for that. Humanity will not be saved from the destination it's chugging on down the tracks toward by the outdated all-powerful Great Man fantasy figure archetype of the past. It can only be saved by billions of people updating their underlying philosophies to match humanities enormous present reality.

And I think that's extremely unlikely to happen.




Anonymous 12/10/15(Mon)20:00 No. 8621 ID: 92c0b9 [Reply] [Last 50 posts]
8621

File 135032400874.jpg - (653.27KB , 800x1200 , swastika.jpg )

“It would be better if there were nothing. Since there is more pain than pleasure on earth, every satisfaction is only transitory, creating new desires and new distresses, and the agony of the devoured animal is always far greater than the pleasure of the devourer”
― Arthur Schopenhauer

So what do you guys think about this type of view?
Such views have been described in modern times in the book "Better Never To Have Been: The Harm Of Coming Into Existence-By David Benatar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpACAyWxleE


68 posts and 16 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Anonymous 15/02/14(Sat)02:34 No. 12033 ID: 03e413
12033

File 142387769387.jpg - (300.58KB , 1000x791 , Albert-Einstein-5.jpg )

Each birth marks the beginning of a life-long conflict between an
individual’s pursuit of happiness and a gene pool’s pursuit of immortality.

But the genes have an unfair advantage, for they have honed their enslavement of individuals over evolutionary timescales.
Does ‘thinking Man’ have a chance of outwitting the genes? Is it possible for an individual to identify gene tricks and assert his will to side-step them?

If the gene pool could think, it would have ‘nightmares’ about the individual who uses rational thought to subvert instincts and get what is fair for an individual to want while denying genes what they want. To the extent that a liberated individual serves as an example for others he is also a menace to the gene pool. If only one generation were to become totally infected and useless to the gene pool, the gene pool would die.This proves that no generation of humans has ever been infected by the notion
of individual liberation.

Humanity is doomed to everlasting enslavement!


>>
Anonymous 15/02/15(Sun)18:24 No. 12041 ID: a6d93e

>>8625
your argument is defeated in the original post - OP posted a quote by a man who shares the same arrogance you just condemned. He has made a judgment based on the ridiculous belief that he has quantified life. such people desire to suffer, and so they will, believing that life's true purpose of self-quantification has come to a stagnation that cannot be remedied(except perhaps by shrooms)


>>
Anonymous 15/04/21(Tue)17:42 No. 12161 ID: 03e413
12161

File 142963093713.jpg - (68.61KB , 324x576 , cat head.jpg )

the optimist’s impatience with or condemnation of pessimism often has a smug macho tone to it (although males have no monopoly of it). There is a scorn for the perceived weakness of the pessimist who should instead ‘grin and bear it’. This view is defective for the same reason that macho views about other kinds of suffering are defective. It is an indifference to or inappropriate denial of suffering, whether one’s own or that of others. The injunction to ‘look on the bright side’ should be greeted with a large dose of both scepticism and cynicism. To insist that the bright side is always the right side is to put ideology before the evidence. Every cloud, to change metaphors, may have a silver lining, but it may very often be the cloud rather than the lining on which one should focus if one is to avoid being drenched by self-deception. Cheery optimists have a much less realistic view of themselves than do those who are depressed




A.I. dhb 15/04/18(Sat)22:51 No. 12138 ID: 7dd04f [Reply]
12138

File 14293903153.jpg - (6.50KB , 185x273 , data.jpg )

I think within the next 100-200 years, true artificial intelligence will be invented. Machines with actual consciousness and intelligence, placed into android bodies, who will then walk among us. For me it raises some questions, which I will now propose to you;

Would you consider such a being, well, a living being?

Should they have the same rights and priviliges as humans?

Would humaniy be able to accept and integrate androids into society?

Should such a being even be created in the first place?


>>
Anonymous 15/04/19(Sun)00:29 No. 12139 ID: d2ef46

This shit's been a Sci-Fi theme since a fucking lifetime ago. There's a ton of material to work with here. Like this comic making fun of AI.

http://www.doesnotplaywellwithothers.com/comic/pwc-0226

But anyways here's my answers to your questions.

>Would you consider such a being, well, a living being?
We've already defined organic life. So we'd have to define inorganic life and then work off of that definition.

>Should they have the same rights and priviliges as humans?
Meh. If they want it then why not. I doubt they'd want the same things as humans though so they'd probably want different rights and privileges.

>Would humaniy be able to accept and integrate androids into society?
That's politics man. Gotta jump the gauntlet of bureaucracy first. In the US Florida would probably be all like "Nope, not happening." And in the UK they'd give them so many rights in an effort to make them equal that AI would have higher social status than humans.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.




marginsoferror marginsoferror 15/01/08(Thu)10:34 No. 11969 ID: fc2a7f [Reply]
11969

File 14207096712.jpg - (43.23KB , 328x310 , doerrorsrepeat.jpg )

my brain teaser for philosophers is so...

if you have found you have a margin of error should you ever bother doing anything ever? you've proven you're not capable of simple things, so why should you bother anymore?

my philosophy has been no margin of error or compromise. ever. it has served me terribly. the simplest decisions with variables to consider can take years a time. but i feel proud not to choose mistakes. i feel it makes me more human than most to live such a way. on attempts on my life in the past. i always had preplaned all possible attacks and real time evasion so none ever worked on me. i feel it makes me much more human to think than just act. ( even if it does win free psychopathic personality disorder in medical records. whats psycho about thinking before you act. i think labeling thoughtfulness wrong is a personality disorder.)


5 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Anonymous 15/02/07(Sat)00:33 No. 12025 ID: 0572d5

OP. Read about the Type 1 Enneagram. I think you'll really resonate with it.


>>
Anonymous 15/02/07(Sat)00:36 No. 12026 ID: 0572d5

You're not a psycho, you're human. Know that you can't be perfect, but don't let that discourage you from trying your best to be as close to it as possible. Nobody should be discouraging you from trying to be perfect, but you need to also learn to cope with failure because failure is inevitable and I think it's good for your health to learn how to deal with the inevitable.


>>
Anonymous 15/04/17(Fri)23:52 No. 12136 ID: 31099f

>>11969

How does one "not choose mistakes"?




Anonymous 14/11/17(Mon)01:06 No. 11892 ID: 1b02b6 [Reply]
11892

File 141618281725.jpg - (77.47KB , 640x529 , 1415688101987.jpg )

I need your thoughts.

Why would this scenario never work?:
A nude society: waking naked in public with the hardest erections you can imagine to show to passersby in a normal context. That is, normal in the sense that nothing is really thought of it but his want for sex in that moment or even his want to just show off his penis? Why is that notion put to such shame in society today? Why are we programmed like this? Does it really fucking matter? I see naked people all the time and don't think anything of it if they were out in public. "But the kids will see it". Well, the kids will find out eventually anyway, so why do you stigmatize it so hardly? There is no social ego with withhold in this society. The fact is, without today's social ego of trying to be better than everyone else, we will be free to do anything we want in a context that will be normal to anyone if the hedonistic aspect of life is sought.

I'm looking for a rational explanation of why it would never work. Not a "you're just a fucking retard". You can understand something but not be able to put it into words. Try.


9 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Anonymous 15/02/07(Sat)12:28 No. 12029 ID: d2ef46

>I'm looking for a rational explanation of why it would never work.

Winter.

There, I just destroyed your scenario with one word.


>>
Anonymous 15/02/07(Sat)12:51 No. 12030 ID: 6e7db4

>I'm looking for a rational explanation of why it would never work.

Women on their period.

There, I just destroyed your scenario with one phrase.


>>
Anonymous 15/04/17(Fri)23:27 No. 12135 ID: 31099f

>>11892

Some people look better than others, much better. When we' re naked this difference magnifies. And generally life is easier for good looking people. So less attractive people will want to cover themselves up. They're not not just motivated by shame, but also by personal gain in general.




Delete post []
Password  
Report post
Reason