-  [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
  • Maximum file size allowed is 1000 KB.
  • Images greater than 200x200 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 524 unique user posts. View catalog

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

Please check this /7ch/ thread to discuss the potential addition of WebM support.

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

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

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

For growing and shit or whatever I present to you:


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.

26 posts and 3 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 14/02/14(Fri)02:00 No. 11120 ID: 29df20

This site is absolutely amazing. Use it well. All the lectures are wonderful.


Check out their other courses as well...

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

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.

277 posts and 15 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 14/04/03(Thu)20:53 No. 11228 ID: 5337a2


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

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.

Anonymous 14/01/07(Tue)07:47 No. 11027 ID: fd5388 [Reply]

File 138907725516.jpg - (43.71KB , 480x353 , 408188_445227882182850_1451379736_n.jpg )

I'd like to toast to hedonistic philosophy.
Let those that take abstinence and urge killing literally and broadly leave the finer things of this short and mortal life to us.
We who know our worth.
We who embrace our ego as an integral part of being wholly human.
We who toil in the shadows improving.
We who embrace this life and all it has to offer.

I have seemingly overcome a weaker individual, I boast and vent my triumph.
I am Alpha becoming Omega.

6 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 14/03/06(Thu)15:52 No. 11162 ID: 5e70c0


What isn't temporary? To me there are merely some forms of pleasures that are longer-lasting and different - important, sure, but not sufficient on their own for some permenant "satisfaction" or "contentedness", if this is what you meant. If not, fufilment of desires is surely preferable to a neutral emptyness.

It's all in the ride, objective ends are merely an illusion, although in seeking objective truths is a more worthwhile ride than living in some permenant drug-induced haze. Reminds me of futurama episode I saw today: "so the pursuit of knowledge is pointless and neverending - Hooray!" - Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth

unit1 14/03/14(Fri)03:04 No. 11193 ID: 2516b1

File 13947626515.jpg - (5.71KB , 200x219 , 1393816735967.jpg )

Beta is the seat of the alpha and the omega when peace must become of a swathe.

... fuck... N370 14/04/19(Sat)18:49 No. 11253 ID: 81fc54

Ego is/gives the meaning of existence in a meaningless existential journey and hedonistic philosophy is the height of emotional honesty

Arguably the realization of the limits of one's acts and potential of one's action has a very Negative Hedonism response, realizing the potential of focuses urges on a task.

I loath the use of Alpha, Beta, and Omega in terms... Myers-Briggs personality types are just concepts, while concepts are wielded by (sub?)conscious acts of will and the purer forms of those in application/being transcend those types. This can be done as one can willfully be empathetic and guess human emotional probability in a very lowbrow compulsive and intuitive sense... same consciousness mechanics, imo.

Anonymous 13/12/04(Wed)19:42 No. 10921 ID: 36499a [Reply]

File 138618257541.jpg - (255.57KB , 1600x1200 , 1334499661043.jpg )

Does Faith require proof /phi/?

Or in other words, can one believe in a deity without proof/do we need proof to continue to believe in said deity?

14 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 14/02/19(Wed)19:19 No. 11129 ID: c069e9


So is knowledge of God a priori or a posteriori?

I would think it is a posteriori, as I don't have some sort of intimate knowledge of God like I have of the fact that 1+3=4.

Being that it is a posteriori, I think it definitely requires some proof. Now, one of the questions that always interests me is if religious experience can just be a basic belief. Alvin Plantinga says yes, Reed says no. I've never had a religious experience, but I don't think I could take it to be a basic belief. Skepticism is so hard to avoid.

Anonymous 14/02/26(Wed)08:15 No. 11134 ID: 618c7b

By definition faith does not require proof, but that does not exclude beliefs based on faith from being rational. For example, it can be stated that the Earth was created 5 seconds ago with the appearance of age, this can not be proven either way, but it is rational not to hold this belief.

In the context of a God, much belief is held based on rationality and logic, as opposed to empirical evidence.

N370 14/04/19(Sat)18:42 No. 11252 ID: 81fc54

>Does Faith require proof /phi/?
Psychologically yes, literally no.
Faith is a personal and intimate thing, if a person doesn't look inward and etc... then it is a theory and not Faith.

cross post in /b/ to compare responses Anonymous 13/06/01(Sat)18:13 No. 10269 ID: cb9fa8 [Reply]

File 137010320396.jpg - (22.03KB , 256x249 , 1370098830473.jpg )

What is important and what is not?

11 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 13/11/04(Mon)18:55 No. 10800 ID: c626a9

Survival is only half of it. If survival was the answer to this question, things like depression, anxiety and identity conflict wouldn't be so common in the Western world. If survival is what is truly important, why do we feel so much emptiness and misery?

Look at the evolution of our society. At first, survival was indeed the main goal. We needed food, so agriculture became the main interest. We survived on and on for some time until eventually, new technology came about in the industrial age; this led to numerous things such as changes in engineering, the ability to transport goods over a vast land mass, the rise of modern medicine, etc etc. Capitalism boomed with the industrial revolution, and we started selling all this shit to people; if you sell your labor to somebody, you get money and you can buy that refrigerator to keep your food cold, that coat to keep you warm, the medicine to keep you healthy, etc etc. You can buy all the things you need to survive

And it became common place, well into the 20th century in beyond, to the point where we're so globalized and commercialized, that the whole aspect of basic survival, at least in the Western world, has became almost irrelevant, because it's almost like a given. That leaves us at the point in human evolution where we go "well shit, I have a roof over my head and food in my fridge and I'm generally comfortable, what do I do now?" Most people don't know, and they buy more shit they don't need, and they become material and petty, and usually, miserable.

So to answer your question, what is important and what is not, most of us will agree that the completely materialistic culture our society has brought-fourth is not, as too many people are often left feeling empty by material things. Even our sexual exploits have been commercialized and packaged in a way, leaving us with empty relationships and frustration felt by both sexes. What is important is to keep progressing as a society, not in a commercial way, but in an artistic, scientific and philosophical kind of way. Playing an instrument, reading, doing something like computer programming, generally gaining as much knowledge as you possibly can and thinking about as much about the world today as you possibly can, is important. Or at least, in a sense, more enjoyable than simply consuming and surviving, because we are at the point where we are far too intelligent as a whole to just keep simply fucking and surviving generation after generation. We know how to survive, now is the time to explore where we can go as a species.

Anonymous 13/11/14(Thu)12:50 No. 10822 ID: b6dcec

It's relative, OP. The very nature of the expanding universe we live in will end all of our existences eventually, about a thousand different, increasingly devastating ways in succession. Odds are great no one not born on this planet will ever know we or any of this ever existed at all. Therefore, nothing we do matters, long term. It all dies with us before we have a chance to share it.

On the puny human scale however, every little thing seems hugely important. ...because we suffer from living short little lives and shrinking our perspectives to fit.

... N370 14/04/19(Sat)18:39 No. 11251 ID: 81fc54

That which is important and precious to you, we all being emerging processes create our family unit. The family units create the tribe. Tribes create a society.

Anonymous 13/09/19(Thu)08:09 No. 10663 ID: b9f316 [Reply]

File 137957099799.jpg - (5.99KB , 240x210 , images (2).jpg )

There is no objective reality
Reality is a language construct
Therefore the most complex reality construct is centered in human society as far we're concerned
Science is the best tool humans have to construct sense and meaning out of this reality
Still sense and meaning is human-centric for we can only make sense and meaning using our cognitive capacities, we can't imagine what it'd be if another being made sense and meaning out of reality in a different "universe" (which could be the same universe as ours, but in a different quality which we couldn't talk about for it doesn't have any of the qualities of this universe(you can't talk about something you can't experience, for the basic functions of sentience in this universe are not the same in that universe) (they have something but its not sentience)
We don't know if there can be something which is physical but can't be discovered or deduced
The limits of my brain are the limits of my world

2 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 13/09/19(Thu)17:09 No. 10666 ID: ae10db

>this is why enlightenment means extreme narcissism
Only if you don't take a path of humbleness.

If you think of the universe as a mechanism, reality can be thought of objectively, and it becomes simple to think of other mechanisms by which another universe would operate.

Anonymous 13/10/10(Thu)11:45 No. 10720 ID: 5b5ccd

1-2: There is no objective reality
Reality is a language construct

This is trivially true. Language itself provides the standard of objecthood; our perception may construct a reality of objects for us in various ways at various times, but we do not call that reality objective until it has been formulated in language, until it is given a nonlocal, nontemporal, identity as a belief or “worldview.”

3. Therefore the most complex reality construct is centered in human society as far we're concerned

This is true. When we undertake the task of “constructing” a reality, when we try to justify our system of objectification and our understanding of reality, we fall back on our words. These words are essentially not our own, they are our engagement with society, our understanding of the functioning of words, our understanding of their use. The most complex “reality construct” is therefore the entire society, as we choose to face and engage it.

4. Science is the best tool humans have to construct sense and meaning out of this reality

Yep. Don’t assume that something is science just because it has grants and a journal article though. All science is local to the context of its initiation and the basis of its institutional possibility.

5. Still sense and meaning is human-centric for we can only make sense and meaning using our cognitive capacities, we can't imagine what it'd be if another being made sense and meaning out of reality in a different "universe" (which could be the same universe as ours, but in a different quality which we couldn't talk about for it doesn't have any of the qualities of this universe

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

Le Sigh... N370 14/04/19(Sat)18:37 No. 11250 ID: 81fc54

File 139792542361.png - (555.27KB , 684x639 , 1395538485980.png )

>There is no objective reality
Yes, there is an objective reality. Modern science use to be a philosophy, then it became obscelete. While jeudo-christianity arguably tries to cover that area of the unknown and unprovable that science isolates as a field of probablity, it is no greater a truth.

>Reality is a language construct
Language is a mind construct, not the other way around.
Words have meanings, they are sentances plus more words, eventually following that you boil them down to concepts, then there is the will-mind that wields them.

>Therefore the most complex reality construct is centered in human society as far we're concerned
Society is arguably just convoluted projections of baser urges.
Politics alone is so removed from direct application that a relatively civil political stance could be justified by almost anything.
The absurdism that is embraced at different levels of society does not make it all an in absurd, application is relative and circumstancial.

>Science is the best tool humans have to construct sense and meaning out of this reality
Language is made up in a person's mind, science is repeatable thus not a whim of the mind.

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

Anonymous 14/04/10(Thu)21:32 No. 11239 ID: 059b67 [Reply]

File 139715833949.jpg - (31.13KB , 455x372 , 1794640_705753989468666_1322974289_n.jpg )

I believe in the mind, especially my mind.I think we should focus on our minds and destroy every other human stuff and social concepts, the stuff that are pust afterwards by tradition or stuff that animals also do like they also get happy but they cant think like us, we should destroy all and stay as a completely pure mind to re-construct our reality all over again by ourselves because the real reality is out of this one and our minds are shaped with its limits to this world and we cant think out of this world but we should to reach the "main reality" and that is so different than this world like the concept of creation and infinity and stuff like those that our minds cant understand dont exist there or has a really different meaning really, i say "us" but i mean I, i know no other who thinks this way, what do you think of this? is there a name for this or is there anyone who thinks this way here? and tell me the flaws of it please.

i have been trying to dehumanize myself for a while and now i none of these stuff written below:
no happiness
no sadness
no sexuality
no concept of beauty
no love
no social dogma

6 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
PlutoniumBoss!Y1SVQJ54eA 14/04/17(Thu)20:59 No. 11247 ID: c1bebf


>So you say we don't have imagination right

Not at all. That's what imagination is. This process of concept synthesis.

What I'm saying is, when you take apart your constructed conceptual world layer by layer, and you get to the final concept and strip it away, what you're left with is not ultimate truth. You're left with nothing, because truth itself is a concept.

It is worthwhile to climb a mountain, but when you get to the top you come back down again. There's not much point in staying up there for very long because there's not really a lot of practical things to do there.

Anonymous 14/04/18(Fri)00:20 No. 11248 ID: eef375

yeah thats what I am planning to do man, just climb the mountain and see where it takes me after that, not gonna stay there if i am not forced to like if there is a huge snowstorm and I cant get down like that.

PlutoniumBoss!Y1SVQJ54eA 14/04/18(Fri)07:26 No. 11249 ID: c1bebf


Just as long as you realize that, by definition, it is pointless to use this method to try to understand any "main reality" stripped of constructed concepts. Understanding something is creating a concept of it.

What this exercise is good for is to gain an understanding of concepts, how they work, what they're good for, and what can happen if you don't pay attention to what they contain.

Anonymous 14/04/03(Thu)06:01 No. 11225 ID: 509153 [Reply]

File 139649766311.gif - (16.70KB , 600x192 , ch950809.gif )

I have two questions.

What is the meaning of this C & H comic? Why does Calvin say ooh, I itch?

Also I have to write a six page paper about any "-ism" that's not religion, what would be the easiest?

2 posts and 1 image omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 14/04/08(Tue)22:54 No. 11233 ID: 82fc74

>art is a lie

Anonymous 14/04/09(Wed)04:12 No. 11234 ID: 54e99b

Write a surrealist paper on surrealism.

Anon 14/04/13(Sun)11:59 No. 11242 ID: d0203d

Make up your own ism and write a paper on that.

Anonymous 14/03/16(Sun)06:28 No. 11200 ID: b6dcec [Reply]

File 139494768557.jpg - (567.03KB , 1200x801 , h.jpg )

So I got in my cave here, and gave it a think, and...

Considering the grand view of human history, accounting for motivations and behavior and its effects short & long term, I think I've come to a couple conclusions.

1. Epicurus probably had right idea.
2. It will take engineered gene therapies to advance human minds to that level of functionality as the norm.
3. Everyone else will most certainly have to die off completely in order to remove the threat of the archaic barbarism.

Until then, human development is on a plateau.

2 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 14/04/01(Tue)03:49 No. 11224 ID: c1bebf

>We can't even sufficiently educate an entire town to a passing elementary grade

Only if you live in the US. The rest of the developed world doesn't seem to have that same difficulty.

Anonymous 14/04/09(Wed)11:51 No. 11235 ID: 5b5ccd

What we really have to accept is that our intellect is a collective achievement and not an individual one, and yet at the same time, those who advance our intellect are rare individuals and not products of mass acclaim or acceptance. We have long been plagued by hippy-dippy claims of the world-soul coming to its Aquarian ascendance, but the brute matter-of-fact is that we now fight all the more strongly for our unique identity (especially as victims) as our identity becomes submerged beneath our participation in the generic subjectivity of universal humanity.

The internet is the purest representation of this generalized subject. In the past, subjectivity was constrained to our immediate interactions and to the vanities of those who published books, but today publication belongs to the universal twittering subject itself and readership belongs to nobody, so there are no concentrated loci of subjectivity based upon positional criteria, but instead a network based upon persuasiveness alone.

We are moving towards a merged subjectivity. We emphasize the conflicts between gender, politics, race and sexuality in order to distract ourselves from our deeper unity. Our neurons are flexible. They do not directly correspond to a body that feeds them information, they correspond to a pattern of input that can become general to all bodies as well it can to a body. The subject is not bound to identity, and politics are not bound to the individual choice of a collective practice, we must in this age look further, and deeper, to see that collective consciousness is not an abstraction or an ideal, but a practical feature of discourse that we must deal with and accommodate.

Matchbox+Prince 14/04/10(Thu)21:07 No. 11238 ID: 2f260d

>In the past, subjectivity was constrained to our immediate interactions and to the vanities of those who published books, but today publication belongs to the universal twittering subject itself and readership belongs to nobody, so there are no concentrated loci of subjectivity based upon positional criteria, but instead a network based upon persuasiveness alone.

As a result, the collective interests of civilization as a whole seems to have morphed into some kind of disgusting parody of ADD whereas the stupidest things go "viral" and become "memes" for roughly two or three weeks, reach literally global attention, and then (with the exception of references on The Simpsons and Super Bowl commercials, which may happen years later) just as quickly disappear, to be forgotten forever. Worst yet is that the capitalistic machine and the wealthy ruling class has figured out how to harness the power of this to extract maximum profit with minimum effort in minimum time. The effect conjures images of humanity as a rambling crowd running in a dense pack back and forth at breakneck speed like little kids playing basketball, being led by old white men in $20,000 suits holding sticks with carrots suspended from them.

As for the OP, so long as most humans are ruled merely by their biological needs and whims, and access to those remains wholly or partially upon how much money they have, the world won't change. The only reason Star Trek was a utopia was because they (somehow) got rid of money. Otherwise, what was Kirk? Just an analogy of a super-rich playboy traveling around the world fucking women from every country after impressing them with his top-of-the-line yacht.

Delete post []
Report post