It's unironically over for anyone who still thinks there's a point to any of this. If you drop the cope and actually use your brain you realize that without some sky-daddy there are no ultimate values, right and wrong are just made-up rules, and your preference for "love" over "hate" is as arbitrary as choosing a favorite color. All of Western philosophy and science, the supposed peak of human reason, just logically dead-ends at the blackpilled realization that life is meaningless. Your belief in anything, even reason itself, is totally groundless because rationalism ultimately eats its own tail and leads to nihilism. The most hilarious part is watching NPCs cling to the idea that life is inherently better than death which is nothing more than a widespread superstitious dumb biological bias hardwired into us like a fear of the dark. If you're a consistent materialist you have to admit you're just a random chunk of matter with no special rights over a rock and since non-living matter vastly outnumbers living matter, death literally wins by a democratic landslide. The only truly rational and egalitarian position is to treat life and death as the same, to overcome your provincial life bias and accept that it's all just nothing.
>>24680623confused why chose nietzsche to accompany this post. i don't think you really got what he was criticising in nihilism or what he meant by 'creating your own values'.
>>24680634True, Schopenhauer would've been a better choice
>>24680623>sky daddyOne of the fastest ways to signal a low IQ edgelord. As a high IQ edgelord, all that's nice, I'm still going to like things. Why? Liking things matters to me, and that's inherently greater than no one.
>>24680623If you actually believed life was meaningless, you wouldn't post this, you would fall down on the ground and stay there until you die of dehydration. There are no OBJECTIVE moral values, truths, or meanings. That doesn't mean there aren't moral values, truths or meanings at all. They're not arbitrary, they justify themselves. You clearly didn't read Nietzsche.
>>24680623The problem is that people think that through progress whether technological or social and scientific techniques stretched out to every corner of life, there’s somewhere a solution to the hole inside of their soul. But there isn’t. You can reason and research and experiment all you want, You won’t find any solace. There is no happiness to be found and no utopia to be built.This leaves you with a choice: you can say, “I don’t except this and will search on” or you can take a leap of faith and find god. But you won’t find him through reason and argument but through love. This is the only way out of this vicious circle. And you can call it a cope all you want, it doesn’t change the fact that only belief in god (Jesus Christ) can provide you with a reason for this endless suffering. Decide my friends.
The entirety of the universe is ultimately going to become nothing more than infinitely stretched particles. That alone gives utmost value to the life instilled in us. We are such tiny finite creatures that exist for mere moments. That fact that we can comprehend and think reflect on it in any capacity is a minor mathematical miracle. It’s exactly because nothing we do matters that anything we do is a great big giant defiant fuck you to the infinite void. FUCK YOU! FOR A FRACTION OF A MOMENT IN TIME I EXISTED! The flow of entropy is relentless, uncaring, and inevitable but what better rebellion than to live?
>>24680623Who's paying you?
>>24680623Drivel.
>>24680623>It's unironically over for anyone who still thinks there's a point to any of this>Posts NietzscheFaggot. Did you just write that whole paragraph to complain about your lack of reason to live? Are you suicidal or just trying to troll people into suicide? Lamest threads that get posted here. Worse than the frog posters.
>>24680688Absurdism is fucking cringe and universal heat death is a western psy-op to instill nihilism and despair. Think about it logically even: How can heat death even be real when the energy to create the Universe must have:>A) Existed BEFORE the Universe out of pure nothingness (assuming God isn't real)or>B) The Universe has always existed and we're worrying about nothing.
>>24680729Absurdism is all the rational man can believe in. You're on an rhodesian carpet weaving forum talking to multinational assholes by shooting data packets at satilites and interpering them with demons in silicon. Mostly it results in you being called a faggot, yet you persist. That's as absurd as it gets, so the question becomes, are you happy? No, doesnt seem like it. I dont care about science; not my problem.
>>24680753Not surprised you responded with more empty-headed soliloquies.
>>24680683>only belief in god (Jesus Christ) can provide you with a reason for this endless sufferingWhat about Buddhists and Hindus? They don't believe in god/jesus
>>24680757Your formal position is "cringe" with nothing more. Aint gotta explain shit, and what I said was more than sufficient, faggot.
>>24680769They obviously have a big problem, as does op.
>but without god you can do anything!!!! Obviously.>but then what makes life better than death?I like life. I want to live. So it's better.>BUT YOU DIDN'T CONSTRUCT SOME BULLSHIT POST HOC RATIONALIZATION TO JUSTIFY THAT VALUE JUDGEMENT!!!!!!!!!!!And?
>>24680774>actually optimistic nihilism is le rational because my based alan watts cia boomer told me so
>>24680798It seems I've dunked on you so hard your abhorrent posts metasticized into your home board's vernacular. Adorable. But no, I'm not a nihilist at all. Not a glowie either. Tell me, oh derp-sama, what do I believe?
>>24680688Screaming "fuck you" to the void by clinging to life is still just playing the game your genes programmed you for, still bending the knee to the biological superstition that existing is somehow better than not. The real rebellion isn't in desperately hanging on to your few seconds of entropy, it's in spitting in the face of the will to live itself. Suicide is the ultimate glitch in the matrix, the one move nature didn't code you to make. Choosing death is the only authentic way to prove you aren't just a puppet of survival instinct, that you can stare at the abyss and not just tremble but step into it on your own terms. Life says "obey". Death says "no". And "no" is the purest rebellion there is.
>>24680786Just as Nietzsche doesn't fit OP, Stirner doesn't really relate to your post at all
>>24680814>But no, I'm not a nihilist at all. Yes you are, airheaded faggot. If you still accept OP's position regardless, however you choose to react afterwards doesn't matter.
>>24680828I give (you) this (you) not because (you) have earned it, but because I choose to.(you)
>>24680817That sure is quite the retarded argument. Writhe or die. Do it for whatever reason you must. Biological determinism faggots make me smile, you absolutely have agency, even if it's small, and even in your own arguments, but your position is that suicide is the ultimate form of rebelion. Nope, it's just a cop out of your telos.>>24680835Go on, tell me more about who I am. I dont accept OP's position at all, I'm just not anthropomorphizing forces beyond my control.
>>24680844>I dont accept OP's position at all,If you accepted we live in a "meaningless universe" (in of itself a loaded phrase based on physicalist dogma), there is no real objection to OP's paragraph. How you go about it is irrelevant to me.
>>24680634>>24680637OP is an idiot who doesn’t read.
>>24680623>"Your belief in anything, even reason itself, is totally groundless">he reasoned
>>24680847The universe isnt meaningless. Seems you're not only smug and illiterate, but also stupid. Just because things are arbitrary and cruel doesnt mean there isnt any meaning at all, faggot.
>>24680623Have you accepted the possibility that life has a purpose and meaning that is unknowable or, rather, that we do not have access to at this point in time? I don't mean at this point in history but in this stage of existence. I've lost faith in Christianity but I'm still convinced that God exists and that death is not the end, I just don't know what that means anymore.
>>24680883>I'm still convinced that God exists and that death is not the endHow did you reach that conviction? I'm just as lost as OP is and wish I could believe in God and an afterlife so I don't kms
>>24680887The particulars of the universe are too specific to be random, regardless of scale. But who cares about an afterlife? You have this life. Go eat a pastry, smoke a cigarette, see the sun, throw a rock, and have a nap. Cant do that when you're dead. And if you dont like any of that? Now you know, do something you like instead.
Skydaddie is the GOAT. At least whimsymax some you nihilist freaks, -- but that's as if He weren't real. Trouble is -- He's literally real.
>>24680623>the real meaning of life is nothing mattersleast defeatist gaytheist
>>24680891To me the universe has clearly got structure and design to it. The theory of a universe without intelligent design is predicated on the miracle of something coming from nothing so you have the choice of two seemingly impossible ideas. But when you learn about the order and structure of existence from the animal kingdom to the complexity of the human being it becomes obvious that design is at play. The important difference is that the creator of the universe is to me, not accurately and definitively described in any of the world religions. If you choose Yahweh or Allah or any other religious deity things will not add up, there will always be some key things that are not answered for. It is to my mind then that God exists but is beyond our comprehension (which is perfectly reasonable given that he is the creator of the universe and I can't even fix a car engine). I believe in God (or whatever you want to call the great architect behind it all) and I certainly believe in the Devil, not a man with horns but a spirit that lurks in and drives for the evil that men do.In regard to death not being the end, there are too many people who have had near death experiences and encounters with people who have passed, including people I know personally, for it all to be imagination or have some kind of bullshit scientific reductionist explanation. Also if God created the world and this is it then that is one hell of a let down.I'm not professing to have any answers but I'm just recognising that the existence of a conscious creator and greater purpose to existence just seem evident to me
The more Nietzsche I see in the modern day, the more I think hes the worst philosopher to ever sweep the world in influence.
>>24680623True. Embrace east.
>>24680947>love thy neighbor as thyself>your neighbor is thyself>therefore love is just self-seduction
The fact there is anything at all always seemed liked there had to be "something" to it, even if inexpressible in human reason. It's just too fucking strange I am here at all.
>>24680637That still wouldn't have been appropriate, schope never endorsed being a whiny nihilistic faggot, he was a cynical pragmatist just like neetzsche >>24680947I value a lot of his critiques, especially of christianity. I feel that way about plato
>>24680640I love sky daddy it makes me laugh every time I read it.
its called raising your family to be good people and being good to your community
>>24680623>just logically dead-ends at the blackpilled realization that life is meaninglessI sure wonder if there is a philosophy that uses this as a premise, instead of a conclusion.
>>24680676>you would fall down on the ground and stay there until you die of dehydrationb-b-but it goes against my le biology!!!
>>24680683>if you gaslight yourself into believing my cookie cutter life philosophy, you will live for a false meaning and feel fulfilled!A life of cowardice is worse than a life not lived
>>24680729>>A) Existed BEFORE the Universe out of pure nothingness (assuming God isn't real)You can't make this presupposition, and it's always funny watching room temperature IQ retards with no understanding of physics bring up this point. We have an extremely limited understanding of the world as it is, from an extremely limited vantage. We don't even know the conditions required to create matter (though we know it's possible because we can observe it). At a quantum level, events have no cause, they have probabilities. That the universe has a beginning is a statistical certainty in an endless quantum void. The heat death of the universe/big rip are two phenomenon that are actively being observed. Matter is currently stretching at a rate that is FTL, and entropy is one of the few things in the universe that can never be observably destroyed.
>>24680864Where is the meaning in the universe, and how do you identify it as an objective extrinsic meaning?
>>24681701Nietzsche also builds on it and isn‘t a fag like Camus
In one of the first platonic dialogues it is argued that God approve of some actions because they are just, but what makes them just is not the fact that they're loved by god, so the logical conclusion for me is that you have to examine each action to see if it's just, it if it's just it should be approved by god Furthermore I don't think that this idea that without god there's no morality is relevant, there are laws and society did not collapse after securalism, because there are ethical positions that are considered stronger than others
>>24680926>To me the universe...Fine-tuned argument has been dismantled several different ways. It is impossible to argue that the universe is "fine-tuned" as it stands as we exist in the only universe we can experience, as it is able to exist. Any universe that is able to independently exist must be "fine-tuned". Entropy and cosmic chaos will reorganize things as necessary to make them "work", regardless of universal constants. This is a statistical certainty in the long term. Nothing was able to exist for the first few billion years post-big bang despite this "fine-tuning".>it becomes obvious that design is at playWhat becomes obvious is how painfully inefficient and fragile the entire animal kingdom is. The human body alone is full of biological redundancies and unnecessities. And evolution has been objectively observed to occur, outside of fossil data. Again, over a long enough time scale, events become near certainties.>I believe in God (or whatever you want to call the great architect behind it all) and I certainly believe in the DevilFor someone speaking out against major monotheistic religions (though unsurprisingly, only Judaism and Islam), you sure seem like someone who believes in a benevolent (read Christian) god.>In regard to death not being the end, there are too many people who have had near death experiences and encounters with people who have passedA near death experience is not a death experience. There is a scary amount of bodily function and responses that occur outside of the conscious mind. The brain, upon realizing that the body is likely to die soon, releases and insane amount of the most powerful psychedelic known to man. Am I having an enlightening religious experience if I drop acid and see the devil?>bullshit scientific reductionist explanationGot it. Instead of accepting the studied reproducible phenomenon, you stick to the notion that your invisible creator is looking out for you.
>>24681736Societies of dinosaurs existed for millions of years absent any organized religion. Societies of apes and lobsters exist in hierarchal equilibrium - again - absent any organized religion. It seems like evolution has a built in safeguard against a species destroying itself. I understand it feels good to ascribe the motive extrinsically now that we've developed the intelligence to even make the remark, but why extrapolate from what is evidently absent everywhere else?
>>24681714The subjective meaning of the universe is sufficient for there to be some meaning in the universe, and therefore meaning does exist in the objective sense as well by virtue of me telling you about it, and you being able to extract any continuity between concepts. Meaning to me, meaning to you, and shared meaning between us are all types of meaning.
>>24681763If the meaning you speak of is subjective, there is no objective meaning in the universe. Any other kind than an objective meaning is irrelevant. The flaw in a subjective meaning is there is no universality in its application, or to its truthfulness. One can easily live for a lie.
>>24681778Anon, I checked your power level, and you didnt pass the bar. The cartesian method of doubt is irrational and I'm playing a semantic game. Subjective and intersubjective are types of meaning, and if a type of meaning exists, meaning exists in an objective sense by necessity; the specificity of which meaning is what does not relate to the concept of meaning in general. The epistomology of that meaning can be debated, but the ontology cannot, and you independantly verified it by participating in the conversation. And there may not be universal-ness in application, but there is sufficient usefulness in application, which is the next best thing. Whether you live for a lie or not is outside of your control, but just because lies exist doesnt refute the possibility of truth; in the absolute sense it's beyond your scope.
As soon as you decide to value something, to exert your will in any way you're immediately back to being subject to external rules imposed from something above you.
>>24681791Fair enough. The universe is full of unqualified meaning. Philosophically, that adds nothing of value to the conversation, but you win brownie points for an ontological gotcha.
empty cliches. you are unintelligent and conventional. the word "meaning" is meaningless, and no, unlike what the french want you to think so they can sell their books, people can and do live just as well without god or any objective "meaning". we are born with drives and pick up an infinity of other desires along the way. hate is an unpleasent feeling that leads to more unpleasentness, thats sufficient reason to stay away from it. biological fear of death is sufficient reason to not want to die. there is nothing wrong with killing yourself necessarily and universally either. you engage with the prattle of these existentialists because you are easily impressed and possibly surrounded by even more boring people than you.
>>24681823It sure does, think about it for a second. I proved metaphysics exist external to a subject and independent of an object. I also proved absolute truth exists with an ontological lingustic proof that cannot be directly refuted without engaging in the concepts that justify it. Think about what that implies; purely subjective rationale need to then be mitigated by the greater order of intersubjective trueness in order to aspire to objectivity if they want to claim legitimacy, because subjectivity is a lower order of relative meaning compared to the objective. What I didnt do is discuss the particulars of which truth is true because I'm a shameless utilitarian, and the trueness of truth is irrelevant as long as it's pragmatic and useful in a continuous feedback model.
>>24681841>It sure does, think about it for a second. I proved metaphysics exist external to a subject and independent of an objectMeaning is not inherently metaphysical. In fact, if it's purely subjective, it's exclusively psychological.>I also proved absolute truth exists with an ontological lingustic proof that cannot be directly refuted without engaging in the concepts that justify it.Where? By stating that meaning exists? I'm afraid you have to overcome quite a few hurdles before that becomes worthy of the label absolute truth. Even that existence exists is only "absolute" within certain presuppositions. Axiomatic truths do not exist when discussing anything outside of analytics (where the rules are clear and defined).
>>24681853Part of the proof was intersubjectivity. This is why your understanding of meaning and the relationship between is was and meaning was mentioned; that's the metaphysics. And absolute truth isnt just like a grand unified field theory, the fact anything can be pointed at with any degree of trueness is sufficient justification that lesser and greater orderness of trueness are contingent. The "trueness" of meaning existing at all is enough to say trueness is an important evaluand, and therefore an aspirational objective truth is worth persuing.
>>24681862>therefore an aspirational objective truth is worth persuingBut isn't again demonstrated to exist. I'd muster a more complete response, but I'm not even sure what you're arguing for here.
>>24681866Not in the absolute sense, it's aspirational. My argument has been: some aspect of trueness exists from an ontological and lingustic perspective; subjective meaning is a form of meaning, and necessarily meaning exists in a conceptual state as a result; this is true based on independent intersubjective verification through language, and therefore; if some trueness exists, layers of trueness exist in greater and lesser orders of magnitude for verification, it is useful to continue to seek higher orders of truth, regardless of whether we can know them subjectively. Personally, I dont think you can know them directly, but that's someone else's problem. I'm just happy that some truth exists at all and more truth might be found.
>>24681704No, it’s the only way to not be miserable the whole time. But if you enjoy this, go ahead. I know it’s going to sound like a cope to your ears again, but to me the nature of human life as suffering points to a god who is love, that’s the only antidote to the path of self destruction. And I don’t want to suffer for nothing, I want to suffer so that my soul is starting to get cleansed in this life. Nothing unclean can enter heaven.
>>24681703I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, or if you're agreeing with me or not, but yeah, it would go against your biology. By your mere existence as a human being you have had values wired into you from the moment you were conceived. Western autism has convinced us that these values don't "count" unless they exist outside of us. So when we came to the realization that it doesn't make any sense for a value to exist without a subject holding said value, some people came to the conclusion that values don't exist at all. Which isn't the case, the fact that what you value is created by your way off being (i.e. biology, culture, upbringing) doesn't mean that those values aren't realI skimmed the thread and see people arguing about God and Plato and Idealism. All that stuff is moot, if you can't justify values in the purely material realm, creating a spiritual realm won't solve the problem, it just pushes it down the line.
I believe in a sky daddy, but I still think morality is subjective.
>>24682078You can’t even justify consciousness in a material world, or even thoughts, feelings, hopes, a will, an idea. Do you think these things don’t exist?
There's obviously a point.There is no chance of legacy for the human race or anything in the universe. We came from dust and we will return to dust. That means either there is no point to any of this, which would mean you just wouldn't be doing anything at all and would have no conscious or will or choice, or that there are other realities, planes of existence, beings, ideals, or undescribable things that surround and are affected by our choices in the present. I believe this is the case.
>>24681302bringing children into this world is an act of cruelty, and you have no right
>>24682122No, the bond of love that will be forged between parent and child is the deepest and strongest bond. It’s not cruel it’s the greatest miracle and source of joy to care for a little human being. Also children transform the love you have for your partner, because it stops being about selfish lust and starts bringing responsibility, selflessness and maturity to the parents
>>24680623You're trying too hard. You need to be more chill if you want to articulate your thoughts and not sound like a sperg and laughed at. Didn't finish reading btw.Yes, it's all about who says it.
>>24682105Yes I can:>ConsciousnessA result of neural activity. Do we understand every aspect of it, inside and out? No, but to take that and say "therefore it must be supernatural" is an argument from ignorance. Understanding qualia as idealism doesn't actually add any explanatory power to it, it just says "we don't understand it now, so I guess it's impossible". The brain is very big and complex, and to understand it fully will take a while, but the parts we have done so have all given us material answers>ThoughtsNeural activity, we can pretty much map thoughts 1 to 1 onto which neurons are firing in animals with very small brains>FeelingsSee above, another word for the same thing>HopesAgain, see above>A willAre we talking about Nietzschean Will? Because that's all material>An ideaYou're just listing synonyms to make it sound like you have more arguments than you doSo yeah, I believe those things exist, it's just that the clearly measurable neural activity that proceeds and can predict it is a better explanation than saying it must exist in another world, then not explaining how that other world creates, transports it, and applies it to ours
>>24680623The natural sciences have revealed that the universe is a creative process that has continually "increased in complexity," meaning that it has continually generated new possibilities and interactions that were previously impossible.For example in the very early universe it was too hot and dense for even atoms to form. When the universe expanded and cooled enough for it to do so, the emergence of atoms made possible the formation of stars and galaxies. The first generations of stars forged heavier elements that previously didn't exist, which made the formation of rocky planets like Earth possible. Which made life possible, which made consciousness possible, and inquiry into the nature of existence including perspectives like yours.The universe has a trend through the ages of enrichening itself, of deepening its interactions and enhancing its beauty and meaning. You say life is meaningless? To exist is meaning itself, is to exist is to interact, to relate, to make a difference to the lives of others.The question is: what differences will you seek to make? What will you affirm, what will you embrace, and thus seek to nourish and protect?
>>24682731The universe is a creative process, but it is also a community of co-creators which includes conscious and aconscious entities, living and nonliving, real and imaginary.Something very much like an animistic perspective is in order, without essentializing all entities as being necessarily conscious. What is certain is that the language used to describe reality must first and foremost affirm the massively co-participatory nature of reality.
>>24680623>without some sky-daddy there are no ultimate valuesNo. Learned lessons are real. Everything you typed is wrong.
>>24680623There's sunrise, noon, sunsetThe moon goes in phases The tide rises and fallsThe seasons change from winter to spring to summer to fallCivilizations rise and fallWe wake, live, sleepBorn, live, dieEverything in nature is a cycle, who's to say that our consciousness is any different? I think it's a strong possibility that reincarnation is a real phenomenon and our consciousness is recycledAlso, there has to be a creator, something can't just come from nothing. At least Christianity and Gnosticism offer explanations, even if it's just that the ways of God are mysterious to us
>>24682706>>24682731How does inanimate matter transform into a living being?Does life just spawn from particles that are flying around while getting boiled?What you are doing is unjustified reductionism.
>>24680993Oh, wow, Plato sounds based unlike Nietzsche.I tend to have certain Platonic insights randomly sometimes.
Materialism was disproven. /sci/ agreed, don't bother them about it.
>>24682986Are you asking me to explain the entire process of abiogenesis? We have pretty good models on how most of the stages happened. Not every single stage, mind you, but we're talking about something that took a lot of time a really long time ago. I'm noticing a pattern in these arguments for Idealism: they all hinge on the realm of ideals only interacting with the realm of material when it's extremely inconvenient for us to measure its effects. As our ability to measure things increase, the arguments for idealism decrease:Vitalism proven wrong with organic chemistry Crystalline spheres proven wrong with better math and opticsetc.
>>24683255It appears a few people who arent well read got riled up. Didnt even recognise transcendental arguments.
This entire modern (and distinctly modern) debate about materialism vs. idealism is all sorts of stupid because practically everyone's forgotten the definition of "matter".From an old post:>"Materialism" gets things completely wrong altogether from the get-go because everyone's misusing terms introduced by Aristotle without understanding anything. Matter, classically understood, is the principle of individuation, differentiation, and decomposition. It does not exist without a form, a configuration, without being 'informed' by information, where form is the principle of unity, intelligibility, of integration, what makes a whole a whole. The simplest subatomic particles that constitute "matter" themselves must have a form or else they don't exist, i.e., they must have a spin, a mass, etc. With this division, you immediately have that form, information, configuration, is essentially immaterial, precisely because it is not matter in the classical sense. Everything sensible is a composition of matter and form, where matter is the limiting principle of form that's unbounded. What can we know about unbounded immaterial form? Very little outside of sense experience, but we already know that it is far beyond anything we can conceive.
>>24683255You want to tell me, that this hypothesis, which describes an evolutionary model of increasing complexity in atoms and particles, can explain that life just happens to spawn from lifeless matter? And that this is possible because it just takes a very long time, so it won’t ever be observable?Oh boy, materialism is a hell of a drug.
>>24683407First off, you're the one who brought it up to prove Idealism, burden of proof rests on you, not me, saying that it's unfalsifiable either way would support me, not you. Actually observing abiogenesis is very difficult, but it's still falsifiable because there are experiments and models that have supported it. And you've also failed to refute the central point: in every instance where a phenomenon has come down to Materialism versus Idealism, Materialism has won. Idealism only thrives where we have very little knowledge of a subject. The more we know about a thing, the more material causes we see. Idealism only exists in the gaps of knowledge, which are becoming smaller and smaller by the day
>>24682134You think only of yourself but the child never asked to be born into this world to suffer for your vanities, fantasies and inadequacies.
>>24680623You’re just getting started, come back when you have exited the tunnel.
>>24680683>there is no happiness to be foundObviously false, I feel happiness all the time? You don’t? Should get that checked out honestly
>>24683669Ok, this is the last time I’m responding. You’ve brought your points about thoughts and consciousness being observable in the brain via neurons firing at a certain time and activity of a certain area in the brain. I get it. But if I think of a lion and then a certain neuron fires we still have the problem of the psychic phenomenon that follows that neuron firing. I’m not saying that the thing that I would call soul, doesn’t correspond in any way to body. But the way in which it does correspond with the body cannot be reduced to mere brain activity and firing neurons. We still have the activity of the soul with its psychology and general conscious activity. You claim that this was decided in favour of the materialist explanation, I’m saying that there is a whole field in philosophy, bordering psychology and neuroscience, called philosophy of the mind. Where exactly these difficulties i alluded to are discussed, precisely because the materialist explanation falls short in every way.
>>24683816I feel happy at certain moments too. But lasting happiness is not possible in this life.
>>24680623All of that bullshit words for what. When I accepted nothing mattered I figured I can just think of anything. Look up. That's something. Look at my screen. It's something else. This is how reality works. Tell me what thought is there that can hold absolute weight in our head and never leave and not let us experience reality continually. Even if you're buried alive you just die and life still goes on somehow in the afterlife. Life has no stop and no thought is important enough for your brain to not move on to the next thought. >nothing mattersYeah I know. *goes back to reading whatever I want and playing videogames and getting drunk* It's not that deep bro.
>>24684589>the materialist explanation falls short in every way.No it doesn't. It's only thick-skulled christcucks that can't accept the truth.
>>24680993His "critiques" of Plato are all strawman trash and be critiques "Christianity" by exclusively dealing with easy German Protestantism pietism instead of any serious Christian philosophers. Nietzsche was an incel sophists and the fact that he is the most popular philosopher of our era, the philosopher of the masses in the consoomer era, tell you everything you need to know.He shit on Socrates for being "weak and ugly' but Socrates had a wife and kids and fought the Spartan elite in battle man to man and distinguished himself in battle. Nietzsche got kicked out of a non-combat position for being too much off a pussy and was "traumatized " by seeing only the after effects of battle. He thinks he is more of an aristocrat than Plato. It's comic.
>>24684781>Nietzsche was an incel sophists and the fact that he is the most popular philosopher of our era, the philosopher of the masses in the consoomer era, tell you everything you need to know.I genuinely unironically kind of agree nowadays, but Im working on developing a big critique of him that doesnt fall to the same problem I have with him of essentially making philosophy closer to religion.
The real schizopill is realising that rational order and logic is just a symbolic abstraction we've applied as a language to a subset of reality, and is not necessarily a defining characteristic of it
>>24684597Nothing lasts, not sure why you’re hyper focusing on happiness.
>>24680634Nietzsche is self-refuting so he attracts retards who grasp on to one element of his work. You need to realize that Nietzsche never really overcame Schopenhauer and especially Wagner. He may be a materialist but he basically has nothing in common with any materialist that ever lived. Ezra Pound called him the one modern Christian and he was may be right
>>24685934>>24684597Love last forever which is lasting happiness. But love exists beyond plasure/pain axis and requires suffering. But putting happiness as your goal all the time is cucked and will lead to less happiness
>>24684781>the fact that he is the most popular philosopher of our erafirst of all philosophy is not popular in our era, and your argumentum ad anti-populum is infantile. he is misunderstood, doesn't tell you much about his value as a philosopher
>>24684781as for your picture quote, it is ahistorical in 2025, in ancient greece not being able to carry a spear meant your polis is conquered and you are enslaved and killed, today all you have to do is play call of duty and you are ready for drone warfare. morality is dependent on historical circumstances.
>>24680623Imagine typing all this out and actually believing it.
>>24685546>The real schizopill is realising that rational order and logic is just a symbolic abstractionYes but so what, math is also like that, it is still useful in physics for example, it reveal and tests aspects of reality we have access to. And we do come to some new conclusions using abstract formulas that predict something about the nature of our reality. The description of a thing is not the thing in itself, but it can be a useful mode of (partially) understanding it. In other words, it just works.
>>24686054>Nietzsche is self-refuting so he attracts retards who grasp on to one element of his work.HOLY FUCKING SHIT THIS. THANK YOU. Somebody noticed this. This is why I say that Nietzsche made philosophy like religion. Because his followers do this same insanely twisted complex framing of "the word of god" that makes it sound more coherent or palatable than it is. Where they selectively interpret certain passages in the bible in certain ways, and ignore or rationalize other passages that sound DERANGED coming from a religion of forgiveness and moral superiority.Its part of why I dont talk about philosophy on /lit/ anymore, combined with Hegel. I cant really be bothered to deal with the super esoteric seemingly echo chamber underpinned preconceived ways of which to look at and understand these works to make seem so internally coherent, that you can never criticize it from the outside without accepting certain language thats not necessarily implied by the work, but is almost sort of implied by a post hoc understanding of what the work should be...before its even is. If that makes sense.You can refer to and quote Nietzsche's direct words and yet theyll come up with all sorts of excuses why what hes literally saying isn't actually what hes literally saying, but when you ask for the proof of why thats not what hes literally saying, the rationalization always comes from outside his work, or is fundamentally interpretation based.So why is one interpretation preferenced over my own?Because its a religion. And religions are echochambers filled with people of some sort of authority or power which reinforce certain believes and understanding and expound that reinforced understanding loudly and openly till it becomes either a dominant understanding OR the dominant "sophisticated understanding".The easiest concept of Nietzsche's to realize this with imo. Is ressentiment. The most convenient concept ever, so convenient and applicable to so much, that its borderline meaningless to me.
>>24684781>the fact that he is the most popular philosopher of our era, the philosopher of the masses in the consoomer era, tell you everything you need to know.You just described plato
>>24686295And kant and descartes
gawdlike...
no matter what sort of notion or idea or ideology you hold of reality and how you perceive it, even if you renounce perceiving it or any value it may or may not have, it all still serves the same purpose psychologically for everyone. the renunciation of any sort of belief is a belief in and of itself, you cant escape it, whatever you do or say youll always be a slave to interpretations of "reality", if there even could be such a thing, and seeing life through your own fantasy, no matter what it may be or what it may denounce. your ideas were shaped in the same way and for the same reason as the ones of the people you criticize, and thats a good thing, its amazing what the brain can do with nothing but storage of moments, even if you discountenance everything in life your mind still somehow turns it into a positive belief in something when the purpose is ostensibly belief in "nothing". remember your reality is no less subjective than anybody elses
>>24684597very arrogant to assume universal truths
>Nietzsche>retarded interpretation of his philosophy>over 100 repliesMany cases
>>24684781>and fought the Spartan elite in battle man to man and distinguished himself in battleNo he didn't, he distinguished himself in saving Alcibiades who was straggling during a retreat, that's it. No one praised him for prowess in battle.
>>24686628Nietzsche does it to himself
>>24686177There are better and worse interpretations, anon. There are, obviously, plenty of bad interpretations of Nietzsche, but the standard by which those interpretations can be labeled "bad" is Nietzsche himself. He has an entire section of Ecce Homo discussing his own understanding of his books and their intentions, with judgements of whether they hit the mark or fall short. And there's dozens of passages in the published books themselves where he tells you outright how to read him and how not to read him. Beyond that, you're giving short shrift (or ignoring) the fact that he was a trained philologist, and that field is grounded in the careful study of texts and the seeking of internal explanations for why this or that passage may look like they're in conflict but in fact have a resolution. His notebooks, while "outside" his published works, are evidence of how he drafted and edited passages, considered the arrangement of such, and determined how to modulate "doctrines" depending on the book he was writing. That he intentionally presents difficulties and obstacles to readers he intends to filter is not thereby proof of a lack of substance or coherence to his thought, but it is evidence of a flippancy on the part of some readers. And it's perfectly plausible to have a coherent and comprehensive interpretation of Nietzsche's thought *while rejecting him*.
Ya'll need to get out of the house and get a girlfriend. That's how I became happy lmfao. Also, look to sartre instead of nietzsche. Bro had a girl so he was clearly better adjusted.
>>24680623This post reads a lot like the conclusion to Mitchell Heisman's suicide note. Nihilistic views like yours can cause real harm and should not be promoted
>>24686781>That's how I became happy lmfao. what if she dumps you
>>24680817>>24680844If life is truly meaningless and there is no rational basis for choosing among fundamental alternatives, then all choices are equal and there is no fundamental ground for choosing life over death
>>24681703but it DOES go against biology, whats your argument against this fact exactly?
>>24686781>Bro had a girl so he was clearly better adjusted.Especially because he would have wanted me to fuck her, kek
>>24683778are you OP?If so, I hope you get better, whatever you're going through.
The seethe ITT shows just how right OP is and how unwilling people are to hear harsh truths.
>>24686820Then I just get another one. It's not that hard to get a girlfriend
>>24687541What about the pain of heartbreak? People kill themselves over that
>>24680623Egalitarianism combined with democracy is an AWFUL MIXTURE that lets all the idiots vote and give us people like Donald Trump. Removing poll tests was the single biggest mistake in United States history. Democracy actually used to work.If life is meaningless, which there is really no evidence to the contrary, why not just extend it for shits and giggles? Especially if it makes egalitarian democrats seethe for muh "lifespan inequality" right?
>>24687550Tell me you've never had two girlfriends without saying ur a virgin challenge succeeded
>>24680623Read The Birth of Tragedy. Ole' Neechy boy was actually a romantic and thought art and beauty redeemed the world at least early in his writings
>>24687502OP is simply trite and betrays more about his personal life than he does about the conditions of reality. If you are happy in life and experience meaningful relationships, you don't have to question whether things truly mean anything. Their manifestation is enough to dispel any doubt. One might as well ask if one exists, the question refutes the question. To ask whether meaning is real is impossible for anyone who isn't a miserable reprobate.
>>24687877>If you are happy in life and experience meaningful relationships, you don't have to question whether things truly mean anything.What about Tolstoy during his mid-life crisis? By his early 50s, Tolstoy had everything: wealth, fame, a loving family, artistic genius, land, and social standing yet he likened it to someone climbing higher and higher up a ladder, only to realize it's leaning against nothing.
>>24680623am i the only one who finds it comfy in nihilism? sure it's terrible at first but now im glad my life or any life ultimately amounts to nothing, there's no meaning, there's no right and wrong. in that sense life becomes more like a silly game, and you're just playing your turn until its overis this a clown tier take? is this what happens when tragedy turns into comedy?
>>24688258It's just a lazy position to take, like a trivial counterexample in mathematics. It won't be satisfying without more structure, more effort. It's not immediately wrong, but it's a bit boring on its own.
>>24685546The subset still exists, the forms and reason are still embedded in that subset of reality.The rational world was built on top of the sea of chaos, when God subdued the leviathan.
>>24688285hmm, do you think i should expand on it? but i doubt there isn't a better work out there about this specific topic that i'd never be able to match, hell even Nietzsche did it even though his position is more about making meaning out of this meaningless world, mine is simply laughing at it, essentially absurdism with a doompill like those clown characters... they're so they're so joyous even though their face is painted with tears... tragedy and comedy... insanity...oh wait that's just the joker LOL this is why i can never write anything worthwhile my ideas are extremely shallow
At the end of the day, this whole thread/line of thinking is way too anthropocentric.watch any nature documentary any given animal isnt thinking about this shit, its just trudging along, a whale cares for its calf, birds build nests, lions prowl, hyenas scavenge, not giving one second of thought to any words or language, if you want to call that animalistic thats fine, but just remember yall are a part of the tree of life whether you like it or not, if you want to "prune your branch" so to say thats fine, doesnt stop other branches from growing.
>>24688643>mine is simply laughing at it, essentially absurdism with a doompillI think you'll like Bataille and Cioran
>>24688643I recommend reading more serious literature to expand your thinking. Your ideas will feel shallow if they're just bouncing off of other thinkers and public consensus. You need to find something to put perhaps undue confidence into to discover something meaningful. Or just get a little older, who knows?
>>24688073He had been traumatized by war and the level of senseless brutality around him and had personally been plagued by depression at various times in his life. However, to characterize him as feeling total meaninglessness through his later life is false. He recommitted himself to the idea of simple living in close intimacy and love with your neighbors and family. In fact, you could make the case that his brush with nihilism and subsequent devotion to common cause with humanity shows that you can transcend even the most dire philosophical abyss through love and hope (I choose to state this regardless of the obvious abundance of saccharine trite cliche essence which hangs on such a statement).
