so now that philosophy has been going for a couple thousand years, what is their conclusion? have they've even gotten anywhere? i suspect it's all a meme.
Death, consciousness, free will, meaning, and the fundamental nature of existence remain complete mysteries despite millennia of inquiry.We are characters in a story trying to understand the author, building elaborate explanatory systems that never actually solve the enigma of why anything exists at all.
Western philosophy birthed modern science and technological, liberal-democratic society into being, for better or worse.
>>24852237>The point, however, is to change it.
>>24852237>semioticsthe basics are simple and easy to understandbeyond that you can see what "philosophy" does kek
>>24852237be the next carl jung and finish what he retardedly opened up
>>24852239>>24852239>Free willThis one is easy, there is no free will in the absolute sense. Your behaviors are predictable responses to stimuli. There’s only free will in the sense that nobody is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to act a certain way.>consciousnessThis one is actually a mystery. I’m an agnostic, but I have no choice but to conclude there might be something not purely material at play.>DeathOne would assume your consciousness ceases to exist, but since consciousness might not be a purely material phenomenon, it’s also possible for consciousness to exist post-death. But it’s going to be bereft of your memories and personality, so it will won’t he a familiar form of consciousness.
>>24853335not a philosopher
>>24853344So if there's no free will, why are you even conscious, why are you even here?
>>24852237They have gotten many places and depending on what is your area of interest, there might be some golden nuggets here and there. But all in all it never got better than "I only know that I know nothing". But one interesting thing (for us today) is that "to know" doesn't just mean "to posess correct propositions". Knowledge is conformity (literally taking the same form) of two entities, in many cases a mind and a physical pattern, but it goes way deeper, all the way to participative knowledge, knowing something by being part of it.>>24853344>Your behaviors are predictable responses to stimuli. Predictability is a function of system constraints not of determinism. Even in a system with one or more ontologically random variables, you will have fairly certain outcomes in many ways - ie a game of monopoly with perfectly random dice rolls and perfectly free players will 99.999% result in one player reaching a monopoly position by purchasing proerty, on a long enough timeline.
>>24853360hyperdeterminism collapses the will to form culture, government, innovation and art.
>>24852237>so now that philosophy has been going for a couple thousand years, what is their conclusion? have they've even gotten anywhere? i suspect it's all a meme.the world has changed since then but the underlying problem is the same. Human beings and their nature. And the fact that 90 percent of them are abject morons. Take Theucydides, fro example. Any nation that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. QUite poerful of a statement, and obviously so true and concise. Yet... its exactly what the entire world does, still to this day. Is like you're beating your head against the wall, dealing with humanity. Its not the philosophers? Its 90 percent of the *rest*. I have to sit and drink with my buddies? One talking all about the annunaki, the other all about the fake moon landing and both do 911. Which is cool, I like skepticism. But... they *both* came at me with flat earth? I started making fun of both of them."Well, what makes you so smart. How do you know.""Earth is flat? Okay, be logical. Look up at the sun. Its round. The moon? Round. I've seen mars in a telescoe when it was big and close, its round. Jupiter? Seen it, round. Its moons? Round. SHow me ONE thing in the sky? flat. Guys... round sun, round mercury. round venus. ROUnd all the way out to pluto. But earth? Yeah, we're flat."(both of them)"Well, it could still be flat."Then te one hits me with that... the ship shouldn;t have been able to be seem, they calculated the curvature, its proven flat.Both these cretins? Make damn good money and run important shit. And you want to make that horse drink? Its all but willful ignorance. You can't FIX that.
We are in historical purgatory waiting for the final crisis and technological paradigm shift to culminate in a world government and final assessment of human nature and existence with it.
Certain questions can’t be answered Kant talks about this (antinomies) as well as Buddha and Greek skeptical schools (I think Pyrrhonian skepticism)Certain Greek skeptics practiced arguing both sides of a philosophical position, or put to work enumerating the schools of thought around a philosophical problem
>>24854501Many people don’t believe in or respect truth, they get a kick out of lying, duper’s delightI think that’s what’s going on a lot of the time when people go on about Flat Earth or Ancient Aliens, there is actually a good reason to shun them as friends as they aren’t just idiots, they do not value honesty
>>24854501>Take Theucydides, fro example. Any nation that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. QUite poerful of a statement, and obviously so true and concise.Thucydides never said that, but I guess that bare fact still makes your point about 90% of people being morons.
>>24852239But what is provided is a more explorable gestalt of these unseen things which affect our lives nonetheless. Absorbing some philosophy, enough for conversation, remains important. Does it not?
>>24852237You are comfortably shitposting instead of being chained up like an animal and enslaved, so you have definitely benefited from advancing philosophy.
>>24852237The only two disciplines that matter are aesthetics and ethics, and those have been concluded before or with Schopenhauer.
>>24854691Bodied OP
>>24852237The answer to the question depends on whether A or B is true and on whether you find X or Y more convincing
>>24853307I remember there was an anon who posted a bunch of these in '22. I haven't seen this one before so I'm guessing there's more. Where can I find the rest? I only have the propaganda and misinformation/disinformation ones.
>>24852237You need to think for yourself to answer that question, and no one can do it for you. You may benefit from the advancements of science the same way you may eat bread without knowing how to make it, but not with philosophy.
