>Got told to read the greeks>Read them>And the Zeus fucked some whore, whose children were then killed by hera, then the survivor was saved by a centaur, and then he began the journey to save europe from the BBC, and then he got 5 other heroes and then they embarked to north african and fucked some whores, got ETS, 10 of them were killed by sea monsters, then he got into the BBC king of cagliostro and fucked his daugher, which caused Poseidon to send a big flood and then millions died.
>>25496374SOVLOVL
>>25496374They meant Greek philosophy NOT Greek myth. You dun goofed.
>>25496426what knowledge does greek philosophers have that hasn't been superceded by modern college books?
>modern college books>t.commie jew
>>25496521ethicsA huge bulk of post-Socratic philosophy is ethics and how to live a good life.
>>25496530and why can't I learn ethics from a youtube lecture?
Toxotransmosis thread
>>25496537Because you are obviously retarded, that's why.
>>25496537Because nobody has solved ethics yet. Well, some might have, but not through logic.
>>25496777>Bro, how do you solve something that is 100% cultural dependant and 100% subjectiveObjetive ethics can only be defined with religion, any philosophical attempt is just a subjetive opinion of some 140 IQ too smart but lazy snob.
>>25496521>what knowledge does greek philosophers have that hasn't been superceded by modern college books?Start with the greeks
>>25496374This is like if somebody told you to start with the Germans, you started with Oktoberfest pamphlets.
>>25496521every time someone brings up "philosopher kings" from Plato, it's a giveaway they skipped to just pat themselves on the back philosophically instead of putting in the work to learn what others tried before them.
>>25496785>100%cringe take. like saying beauty is in the eye of the beholder. yet every living thing capable of perceiving it converges upon the concept of beauty as it can be perceived within its context. ethics and morality are obviously the same, otherwise all animals would have different conceptions of it, but they don't. that's why you can e.g., play with any other social animal and have them perfectly understand what's correct (moral) behaviour and what isn't.just because you can't perfectly hit the bullseye and the bullseye moves around depending on the situation, doesn't mean that aiming at the bullseye and aiming at opposite end of the room are the same thing
>>25497727>MUH MORALITY IS LIKE PHYSICSMitwit psued cope.morality is 100% subjetive.You cant seriously think is objective when we have people that faps to scat, or those gay furries that put their hands on solid ice to get permanent damage because they wanna live like amputees.Or the faggot girl that caused damage to her eyes because she wanted to be blind and self perceived as blind.Or all the femoids that defend a woman that killed her 3 children.You can't tell which ideology is a superior one when you have fags larping and admring nazis and commies and also fags that worship neo liberalism.Morality is also culturally dependant and westerners love to pretend that porn and gay orgies in front of kids in school readings are ok.
>>25496785Ironically, your proposition is a philosophical claim about ethics that attempts to solve ethics. It's called "subjectivity" or "moral relativity". It has already been tried and explored. It has too many holes. If the subject is the source of morality, then anything is allowed. I can kill your whole family and I can say it was an ethical fact since I am a subject and ethics is subjective. You can disagree with that and kill me too, if you want. Anything can be ethical or unethical, abd thus nothing is. I agree that for an objective morality you need a creator. Not necessarily a religion. Anyways, read Aristotle. And before him read Plato's Protagoras.
>>25497766that's why I define morality can only be defined by divine revelation and not by human judgement.Humans need to believe some divine figure created objetive rules that organizes a culture way of living.Liberal logic and other rational attempts to morality end up in moral relativism.And there's not a scientific argument that can be used to prove or disprove with children male mutilation is good or bad.Why is clitoris mutilation bad, but penis mutilation is ok and must be respected because muh religion?Why is male baby mutilation not as barbaric as girl clitoris mutilation?
