>>83466520
Because the entire philosophy would be "I dont know"

>>83466608
Why can't that be a philosophical stance as much as nihilism is a stance that you know there is no purpose or existentialism which is just cope? i feel like this is just the logical in-between

>>83466520
Why don't we have any modern day philosophers?

>>83466663
>Why can't that be a philosophical stance as much as nihilism is a stance that you know there is no purpose or existentialism which is just cope? i feel like this is just the logical in-between
Who said it isnt?

>>83466732
Well i thought thats what you meant lol

>>83466721
Oversaturation, complacency induced by media consumption and a lot of the basics being already discovered

>>83466765
>Well i thought thats what you meant lol
I think the closest it could come to being a real philosophy is by arguing against all other philosophies and establishing that we can never truly know anything for sure

>>83466888
It's not like this has never been argued for before though now that I realize

The ancient Greeks has the philosophy of Pyrrhonism which argues for the suspendion of judgement against infinite regress which is basically that every proof requires another proof forever, creating a circular self proving chain of reasoning.
Similarly to my claim, Kant argued that there are 2 facets to the world, the Phenomenal world which we use our senses to observe, and the Noumenal world which is base reality, and it unknowable to us, since our reality will always be a reconstruction informed to us by our senses.

Effectively I just add the metaphysical component that the underlying causes and nature of reality is unknowable because there are things we can never prove due to them being completely unfathomable, unknowable and possibly outside of our realm of reasoning, and any argument against it is simply an assumption that this is not the case since this idea is inherently unprovable and disprovable. Word salad but whatever