99.99% of philosophical arguments boil down to “I don’t like X so X isn’t true”. It’s useless, self contradicting, rambling, schizophrenic nonsense.Is there a single book of which this isn’t the case?
You don't sound sapient if I'm being honest with you so maybe just stick to the midwit webcomics
>>24996929Your response has been noted
>>24996923>i made up a strawman of things i dont like so now i can attack it and sound smart
>>24996940>>24996930Noted
>>24996923>I don't like these philosophies, so these philosophies aren't true
>>24996923the golden rule
>>24996923Lmao this image is most of /lit/, never understood it
>>24996923Yeah, just read Parmenides and Melissus, then pull out some brutal paradoxes whenever anyone tries to confront you with the 99.99% of philosophical arguments that are nonsense.
I'll admit, I'm not huge into philosophical literature for this very reason. If your interested in the truth, I think the only place to look is inward. In the end, you will find that all is mind. All division, all description, comes from within. I believe this renders most philosophy empty sophistry. So much was only ever written to defend an emotional or political position, and it lacks the substance and soul to do any good in the world.
you should start from philosophers that explicitly start by retroactively refuting the inevitable posthumous psychiatric evaluation of their "real" base intentions that led them to philosophize
>>24996929smbc author is not midwit. even if his comic is cringe.t. used to read smbc in like 2012
>>24996923I wish to live. Therefore following the philosophy of eating food works.Any argument about anything can be traced to fundamental axioms we can't reduce further except to say it's the "will".
>>24997101It seems to me, then, that philosophy only serves to obscure these axioms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertiginous_question
>>24996923Read Frege
>>24996923I will give you a very short paper to think about. "Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?" by Edmund Gettier.>https://courses.physics.illinois.edu/phys419/sp2021/Gettier.pdf
>>24997199We wouldn't be conscious of them without it. You're doing philosophy.
>>24997204forms are schizophrenic hallucinationsyour imaginary realm is not real
>>24996923
>>24997236critique of pure autism
>>24997236Shilling this book is the only good meme on /lit/ right now.
>>24997199I think it's in general what makes it possible to become aware of them. There's certainly many philosophical concepts which are there to obscure the axiomatic nature. For example, do you think it's possible for 2 people with conflicting sets of axioms to reconcile? If not, they would either have to avoid stepping on each others toes or get rid of each other. There's also option to fool them to think they can reconcile, and keep an equilibrium that way.
>>24996923Reality isn’t fundamentally only rational prove me wrong. Pure reason is a myth to prevent rationalizations for evil from being falsifiable.
>>24997344Seems like most decent philosophers agree but we can't discuss the irrational except with references.We can point at qualia but we can say almost nothing about it. There's nothing to really build on, it just sits there, laughing at pseuds.
>>24997358To discuss irrationality is to run up against the limits of language, as one Austro-British Jew put it when describing the value he saw in Heidegger's work.
>>24997344>prove me wrongWith what? Non rationality?Ok, you're wrong because I say so.
>>24997384>becauseYou gave a reason. Too rational.
>>24996923Yes, I know that OP.
>>24996923>Is there a single book of which this isn’t the case?The Doctrine of Awakening
>>24997226You're a homosexual retard clueless as to what *actual* science (not pop-sci bullshit) is going on behind the scenes.
>>24996923I can't tell if I'm retarded or if everyone here is. Can someone explain the joke? I don't get it.
>>24997700the joke is that philosophy is post hoc rationalization for fee feesthe goal is preservation of egosee >>24997683
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91gT68xeDMM
>>24996923Philosophy is fundamentally masturbatoryIt's what happens when autists try to apply logic to people's lives, or subjective existence as a wholeNormal people don't need to question the nature of anything they do or feel. Philosophers and their worshippers question everything and find satisfaction in nothingThe pursuit of philosophy is meaningless self-harm
>>24996923Yes - socratic dialogues, anything by hume, berkeley and descartes (enlightement in general), then you can read wittgenstein and positivists.you can safely skip everything else, ESPECIALLY kant, hegel and any french philosopher after 18th century.
>>24997078>good in the worldread philosophy
>>24997097Such as?
>>24996923actually they're entirely "X is true so Y is true" with an implicit "i want Y to be true". philosophy is concerned with the former, not the latter
>>24996923I find plenty of ancient and medieval thought to be extremely straightforward, helpful, and illuminating. The Divine Comedy is another great one because it's also a great work of art. The Phaedrus and Symposium are great too.
>>24997078>I think the only place to look is inwardType of nigga to abandon his own children
