Are there any legit modern day philosophers out there? Is it even possible to be one anymore?

Are there any legit modern day philosophers out there? Is it even possible to be one anymore?

Other urls found in this thread:

vox-solis.com/
youtube.com/channel/UCZrMKcDNPruX8ltP0Y0pOTw/featured
youtube.com/watch?v=McAeQiLmEYU
youtube.com/watch?v=a_I94dWg0p0
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

No modern philosophy is a joke.

Would you listen to a smelly hobo who masturbates in public

Kek, Diogenes sounds like a top lad

I am a modern philosopher. Ama

yes

My rational proof of secular ethics would like a word with you.

>Behold! A man!
Never ceases to amuse me.

Nick Land's alright.
Don't know any other contemporary ones other than Zizek, and he's kind of a meme man at this point.

> I am a modern philosopher. Ama
Why did I ask you this question?

Diogenes was actually just butthurt because Plato was getting all the glory of being Socrates' top disciple while he (Diogenes) thought he was the one who truly understood Socrates the most.

They were both taught by Socrates after all. Diogenes just became tsundere as fuck.

018 here. Idgaf

>tfw senpai won't notice you so you start living in a barrel and jerk off at bystanders

Enlighten me please.

You're on Cred Forums

This is where the modern day philosopher's meet.

I-I'm a philosopher?

some people unironically believe this

your lack of even using google OTHER people's critique of that garbage is outstanding even for Cred Forums

philosophers are rarely known in their own time.

if this hasn't been said yet, then
/thread

>inb4 can't /thread own post

018 here
I dont think enlightenment works that way

are you autistic?

I dont know

Hans Hermann-Hoppe counts.

Doctor E. Michael Jones

You CAN thread your own post, it just makes you gay.

as far as political philosophy goes, Hans Herman Hoppe is the only one that has stood out to me

Read "Democracy: The God that Failed"

Me
But i'm only 23 so there's that

Philosopher in what field?

Analytical philosophy is the only one that counts, but the field is so fragmented that hardly anyone particular stands out these days.

Not an argument

terence mckenna

Thomas Sowell, though a trained economist, is about as close to a modern philosopher you will find.

He doesnt write about metaphysical BS, only concrete observations and critisisms of the real world.

I would recommend Knowledge and Decisions, The Vision of the Anointed, A Conflict of Visions, Intelectuals and Society, and Basic Economics. The rest of his stuff is pretty good too. These books will give you a better understanding how things in the real world of real people work, and of the phyc if the average person + intellectual than any 'philosophy' book. That is, if you want to do something useful with your time and not read intellectual circle jerking/shit throwing.

Goes to show you the modern state of philosophy and philosophers when an economist takes a huge shit on their chest and then tea bags them with his massive black balls.

I saw some quote from Hegel about sound and heat or some inane shit like that. I find it hard to take anyone seriously when they talk about that guy.

You know who rocks? Nassim Nicholas Taleb. He's my favorite public 'intellectual'.

Sounds like an interesting guy with polarizing ideas. I'll look into him at some point. My reading list keeps getting bigger ;_;

I like to think that i'm quite the philosopher:

GOD IS GOOD GOD IS GREAT, THX 4 THA FOOD, NOW DIG IN DON'T WAIT

I am a philosopher.

www.thefoundationpress.com

I am looking for other philosophers as well.

all of the cuck academics are jokes

Socrates was a smelly hobo, I suppose the father of philosophy is also not worth listening to.

Philosophy is a cesspool of libtard foolishness and an overarching unwillingness to accept the skeptic's dilemma.

most philosophers nowadays, metaphysics in particular, literally waste their time arguing about concepts they made up, and have little to no bearing on consequences or reality.

>this is coming from a philosophy major

Don't fall for the meme, kids. Its a great program, but you better make fucking sure you do something else too.

Here's mine lad
Only started posting last week though: vox-solis.com/

Next article either tonight or tomorrow

>giving a shit about a degenerate like Socrates

>relying on third party critics to bypass the need to form your own critic

read the book

Understandable position

A LOT of philosophers are jokes.

There are only two worth reading in my opinion. Practical writings on how to live this life to its maximum potential.

Seneca and Marcus Aurelius.

Montaigne is ok too.

The rest are genuine retards arguing about the semantics of the word 'is'

>you better make fucking sure you do something else too.
Any philosopher should also be working on skills and improving their physical forms. Otherwise they are not philosophers. Fucking Diogenes modeled himself after Heracles. Jesus was a carpenter.

You must refine skill.

Yes

Seneca on Discursiveness in Reading:

Judging by what you write me, and by what I hear, I am forming a good opinion regarding your future. You do not run hither and thither and distract yourself by changing your abode; for such restlessness is the sign of a disordered spirit. The primary indication, to my thinking, of a well-ordered mind is a man's ability to remain in one place and linger in his own company. 2. Be careful, however, lest this reading of many authors and books of every sort may tend to make you discursive and unsteady. You must linger among a limited number of master thinkers, and digest their works, if you would derive ideas which shall win firm hold in your mind. Everywhere means nowhere. When a person spends all his time in foreign travel, he ends by having many acquaintances, but no friends. And the same thing must hold true of men who seek intimate acquaintance with no single author, but visit them all in a hasty and hurried manner. 3. Food does no good and is not assimilated into the body if it leaves the stomach as soon as it is eaten; nothing hinders a cure so much as frequent change of medicine; no wound will heal when one salve is tried after another; a plant which is often moved can never grow strong. There is nothing so efficacious that it can be helpful while it is being shifted about. And in reading of many books is distraction.

I like the design of the website and that picture. I gotta make my website look better.

Yes, but they sure as hell don't study philosophy or other social sciences.

Feel free to contact me assuming i'm not too radical for your tastes
Twitter is at the bottom

The closest we get to philosophers these days are shitposters on Cred Forums.

They're the only ones challenging the modern ways of thinking.

>socrates
>degenerate

lol

...

>Would you listen to a smelly hobo who masturbates in public
If the smelly hobo constantly rekt the ideas of highly praised philosophers in public and told the president of the US to get the fuck out of his sunlight I probably would.

he's good, but comprised as are almost all intellectuals in this age. too much obvious pandering to leftists out of fear of ostracism

I don't have a twitter. My email is on my website under "contact". I can definitely see a collaboration in building up both of our websites at the same time if I were to put your writing on mine and direct people to your website.

>canada

>arguing the semantics of the word is

This kind of stuff isn't as bullshit as it appears. Logic and reason had to be "invented" by the ancient Greeks. Formal logic naturally has to start somewhere. Of course to the general population the definition of "is" is utterly useless, but in order to exchange high level ideas past semantics, philosophers need to make sure they are speaking the same language. It's infinitely easier to define semantics at such a basic level rather than ignore it and encounter confusion further down the line. Philosophers didn't spend literally thousands of years figuring out exact definitions for certain seemingly simply concepts for no reason. It's not that we need to worry about the exact meaning of "is" in everyday life. The point is to lay a foundation for more complex ideas.

Just look at SJWs. They are the culmination of using subjective definitions as absolute fact. They lack basic understandings and definitions and as a result their entire way of thinking is built on semantics. That's why it feels like you're talking to a wall with them. They've rejected 2500 years of rationality. This is why cultural marxism is very real, and very scary. It's not just about turning people into SJWs, it's entirely about erasing western civilization all the way back to the Greeks because the west is the only threat to globalism.

Thank you for the reminder. Im trying to get out more but you know, the whole you are the sculptor and marble thing, no pain no gain. I need to retake the iron pill and get out.

Yes, but philosophers are usually known when they die.

Well . . .

I mean . . .

But . . .

Fuck Cred Forums is always right.

Philosophy is a joke, and philosophers are from a forgotten era. Today they would only hold progress back

>he says while posting a philosopher that wished he was Socrates

I think therefore I am.

And what progress is that?

...

Whats most sad about that, is its true. Alt Right is currently the most interesting political/philosophical movement today.

>inb4 le edgy alt right vape memes

C.U.C.K.

Socrates was killed for shitposting irl.

...

>cultural marxism

Most of philosophy has already been philosophied, these men went down in history because they were the first to think of these things. Nowadays there isn't many new things to philosophise about, and therefore less famous philosophers

To be so narrow minded to simply dismiss any other field or type of philosophy is indicative of a weak will and a simple mind. Like a bratwurst without fennel.

Do you remember the posts like a month ago about Cred Forums memeing a new political theory into existence? I'm still pretty sure that's going to happen. Eventually the shitposts are going to accumulate into something substantial and people are going to run with it.

The kek stuff does have genuine believers. If a religion can be spontaneously created by shitposts, why can't political theories? I suspect that we haven't even imagined 1% of what's going to be made possible by the internet. Pretty extraordinary times we live in desu

It's about to make a big comeback when mankind starts "rediscovering" the wisdom the old philosopher's understood.

If that happens, it will be a branch from your local tripfriend's "Post-Ironic Seriousness." Which describes the abstract layers of irony we attack problems from to discern the truth from chaotic noise.

>Diogenes
>Nietzsche

>not anti-philosophers

trips of truth

>Conservative Renaisssance across the Western World

Only if the globalists escalate the migrant crisis even further. Otherwise entire generations of white people will continuously swallow the blue pill and cuck themselves out of existence in their home countries. I think at some point its inevitable, but countries like Sweden and France are fucked.

>Diogenes
>Anti-philosophy
Bullshit. Look how he schooled Plato on pre-emptiness as conceptual fiction.

There are always more torch bearers than those who created the light. You will find wisdom even in the words of Mesopotamians. But who honestly reads such things like the Dialogue of Pessimism except dedicated humanities students who take a broad view of history.

I'm reminded that someone posted a troll video about how to give your iPhone 7 a headphone jack with a drill. And people wanted to sue the guy. Yes, they took a drill to it. Ignorance is decadent.

nigga idk

This desu.

Everything modern is basically raising controversy for its own sake and undermining everything the Greeks and their Medieval/Christian analysisers understood, if not disregarding it entirely.

The Matrix movies and the sense of confusion and meaningless they engender are all you can get out of modern philosophy. Prove me wrong, protip you can't.

Semi-witty insult =/= philosophy.

The inability of plebs like you to understand that getting the last word doesn't make you right is what's wrong with much of the world.

I think if Trump is successful in turning around the American economy, you will see a strong Conservative America be a role model to the rest of the world.

That we escaped our version of the "Arab Spring" without killing each-other is a White-miracle. They literally paid niggers to be violent and we kept calm and intelligently waged meme warfare on the enemy.

We will overcome. It is predestined at this point.

>You're on Cred Forums

>This is where the modern day philosopher's meet.

WE

>Nietzsche
>Anti-Philosopher
Oh boy I guess you think Nietzsche was FOR Nihilism.

You don't understand his argument.

...

No shit, but generally speaking, many majors have no prospects in the market other than teaching philosophy.

Developing yourself is a duty to your own being, you are completely correct, but stoicism isn't the accepted doctrine these days.

That picture is missing the best half of the Alexander the Great quote.
Diogenes' response is something along the lines of "Were I not Diogenes, I would also like to be Diogenes."

>Majors
No real philosopher attends modern university for 'philosophy' if they attend those brainwashing factories at all.

>etake the iron pill
What is the iron pill?

Yeah I know but the average human doesn't need to read that crap. It is the reason why philosophy is considered a joke these days - because that type of drivel is what people mention at dinner parties to seem smart

this guy
but apparently I'm a reddit fedorafag and Cred Forums doesn't like him

The average person should lead an average life and die an average death.

I would say you are partially true, but you fail to notice that mostly all public schools teach NO philosophy or critical reasoning WHATSOEVER

If you want to be exposed to this material, you literally need to be struck by a muse, or told about it, or exposed in a class.

Yea, you shouldn't have to go to university to read into the material and be a real philosopher, but you can't just write off every university student and faculty member ever.

Remember that some of the greatest modern philosophers were both students and mentors.

How is his name pronounced? Dio-geens? Dio-genis? Die-oh-gennes?

yeah, too bad he turned into a self absorbed niggerish internet personality

He is in spirit the father of Cred Forums

An average person who digests Seneca's works will live a better life.

An average person who digests mental masturbation semantics philosophy will lead an average life.

deeohyehnis

Is that all you're arguing? You would be 100% right.

philosophy's dumb and more importantly, it's useless.

Good riddance to those self-important assholes.

>Are there any legit modern day philosophers out there?
No. Humanity does not change, everything worth knowing about human nature was written down centuries ago.

>This is where the modern day philosopher's meet.
That would be /fit/

>Descartes

>Valid

>Nietzsche
>oh shit nigger what are you doing

Nice pleb tier philosophy, bro.

Thanks abstract indigenous flag

I don't think you can be a modern day philosopher
Theres just too much knowledge out there to know even 1% of it
Then you have to swallow so many pills:
You are not rational at all
Probably no such thing as truth
no god
You dont matter at all
Universe is unfathomable to an ant like you

Behold, Homo Superior!

In fact, Diogenes is probably THE figure we need to expose to the mainstream as the champion of modern philosophy.

Descartes is only made invalid by Spinoza. I imagine he's on the list for perspective on Spinoza's work.

Nietzsche is reddit shit. Get out.

You're not wrong.

>Making value judgements is stupid guys!
>But it's ok for me to do it because ubermensch lololol!

>shitting on Kierkegard
Knight of Infinite Resignation detected.

>shit opinion
>weeb cancer
>leaf

It checks out

He's so deep

This MGTOW guy is pretty good
I don't agree with everything
but it's actually philosophy
youtube.com/channel/UCZrMKcDNPruX8ltP0Y0pOTw/featured

What kind of drivel?
Some don´t just try to appear smart, but are actually interested about things they talk.
>those self-important assholes.
Just try to separate the subject and the person who speaks or writes about it.
What should philosophy do or achieve, that you could consider it useful?

With progressivism in mind modern philosophy should put more effort towards proving ancient philosophers theories wrong.

I'll always appreciate him for his stance on Islam vs. The West, and the work he's done for years spreading that message.

Nothing, pretty sure. By definition it produces nothing worthwhile. The best philosophy is no different than the worse. All it is for is to give smartypants a reason to feel smug.

Underrated

if any of you niggas don't understand Kant and why he is important, yet say that we only need the Classics (which are pretty fucking excellent) you need to drink bleach.

Kant basically molded the modern thought of the Enlightenment, which many of you like to masturbate over as the peak of the western world. He gave two of the most important theories for Epistemology AND Morals.

The only guy that is on par with Kant (from his time), is Hume, and most of you don't even know him either.

Hegel was a fag though.

>What should philosophy do or achieve, that you could consider it useful?
A stronger society. Optionally: one that's also more pleasant to live in.

He was going by time period, so some obviously get included or excluded unreasonably.
A better solution would be putting colour-coded background squares behind each of them.

I think the orange segment is actually pretty questionable. What can you point to there that's a lasting "positive" and not just questions about old ideas that haven't been asked or discussed properly before?
A bunch of heretics and then atheist liberals is what. Uncritical support by their immediate successors and ideological dependents, along with the weight of time, have justified their fame more than a lot of things desu.

Right on.

>If you want to be exposed to this material, you literally need to be struck by a muse, or told about it, or exposed in a class.

I got into it through reading history books that would mention these things as if people should know what they're talking about (LMAO), and a tangential influence in religion.

An average person can't even digest that though.
They have to get degenerate 20th century French/(((French))) and Germans/(((Germans))) to chew it up for them and vomit down their mouths like penguins.

Maybe he thought/said he wasn't, but you shall know a tree by its fruit.

Now you're showing me the meaning of emptiness.

not an argument

So, again: what is worthwhile? Money?Has it not been any part of building that?

Why does "stronger" have value? What is "pleasant"? Why does "pleasant" have value?

socrates is not the father of modern philosophy, plato is.

This cunt is why people don't respect philosophy

is this david bowie?

Yeah, money's worthwhile, sure.

if beauty is good then good is beauty

>It's all subjective man
it's not.

If anything there are way too many philosophers these days. It'll be decades before the wheat gets sorted from the chaff. Also the accepted practices of doing that sorting (ie academia) are completely broken and subverted. What others in this thread mentioned concerning Cred Forums being a bastion of modern philosophy is an example of the system that will replace academia. A completely uncensored crucible in which ideas will clash until only the best survive. Along with the memes and shitposts, those are forever.

this

I've hung out with smelly hobos and been one myself

being a smelly hobo is just idealism. It's not the true path. People like to think that you can gain the ultimate mind by doing so, but you get bored with it just as you are bored with your current life.

Philosophy is only a joke to solipsists, which there are many today

>french philosocucks

>anti philosophers
>not philosophers themselves

When people make arguments like you, there is no need to listen to them, because they don't believe in anything, so you already know a priori that you can't learn anything from them

when Plato or Aristotle wrote their texts, they argued about why virtue is good, why hapiness is good/desirable, what is goodness, what are politics, what are ethics, etc...
They didn't circle around the question thinking "oh, this is so self evident", because it's a legit question to ask and their theories could lose weight based on the interpretation people have of it.

Please, don't think that defining the concepts you use is something bad because Derrida or whatever

>being a smelly hobo is just idealism. It's not the true path
That's interesting. If "ideals" are something that becomes your center, and allows your mind to be at rest with a structure, then that is where your journey begins.

I think this means the journey involves the introduction of new ideas and release of old ones.

That "mechanism" for catch and release of ideas shapes your existence. How tightly do you hold concepts? How easily do you let them go?

consider the following:

Nietzsche is considered the edgiest fedora tier philosopher, and as a result, you shouldn't listen to him.

Has anyone ever realized?

>modern day is about irony
>thus, truth is the opposite of irony. It's not 'cool' anymore, because irony is cool
>that is, detached non-caring, detached nihilism, is cool
>as a result, truth has become edgy
>since truth is edgy, and nietzsche is the edgiest, he contains the most truth

>it's not.
I'm not claiming it is, I'm just asking you to rationally justify your apparent conviction that it isn't.

I don't believe in nothing. Even if I did, that's irrelevant. I'd just like to know what rational basis your certainty has, unless you're admitting to being irrational in which case fine.

>Muh brain hurts because hard questions
>Call people cunts and ram fingers in ears
Cool

What's the word on the street?

Ah yes, truly the greatest philosopher of our time. The "not an argument" principle truly has revolutionised thinking across the globe.

Honestly though, "political philosophy" to me kind of seems to be only borderline deserving of the name, since the more enlightening parts of it are more accurately termed science (namely biology and the economics that underpin it), while the rest is generally post-facto rationalisations for subjective opinions, or unexamined biases.

When you do encounter differing "political philosophies", they usually come from such different groundings in metaphysics and "moral philosophy" (itself kind of questionable) that them dealing with each other is almost impossible, particularly when the arguments frequently go into arguments about history and historical narratives (the more shit-tier of which rely on unsupported or unfalsifiable claims).
Then there's "political philosophies" which have nothing to do with logic anymore, having degenerated so far from the bad logic which produced them, namely democracy, and communism. Of the three "mainstream" post-classical post-Christian ideas, only liberalism has some intellectual ground to stand on, and even then it's becoming increasingly abstracted, tangled, and convoluted in minority (or should I say, "(((minority)))") circles within the broadly liberal intellectual circles.

Of course a Naziboo would miss the point of the joke so hard as to think that a comeback.

>Nietzsche is edgy
>Truth is edgy
>Therefore Nietzsche is truth

NOT AN ARGUMENT

(Good observation though).

youtube.com/watch?v=McAeQiLmEYU

>throwing out dialectics which is literally proto-redditism
>reddit shit

Not sure if trolling.

you're just like a child though. Asking why to everything - if someone gave you an answer to those questions you'd likely waste time and find another word you want defining.

Also the idea that you can't learn from people who don't believe anything is retarded. A rock doesn't know anything. Plate tectonics don't know anything. Photons don't know anything. Do you think nothing can be learned by interacting with these things?

I mean, I like to carry things to their end

that is why I decided to hitch hike. For 2 years I hitch hiked back and forth around the U.S.

I have hitch hiked over 10,000 miles

I can tell you right now that while this is an enlightening thing, it is not the true path, and it becomes muddled in repetition just as normal living does.

but yea you're right about becoming at rest with structure. I wanted to do it because I figured it was an itch within me, that if I never got around to scratching, i would forever regret. I wanted to take the non-belief in structure to it's logical end, so that's what I did.

I can also tell you this is what made me more spiritual. Call it 'coincidence;' but when your mind become more and more entangled with the 'flow' of the universe, things happen more and more that would seem to a callously rational observer to be coincidence. But it becomes irrational to call things coincidence, when the likelihood of the events happening becomes less and less

I don't regret being a homeless hitchiker for all of that time. It basically gave me a spiritual core that is unshakeable. All I'm saying is that it is the beginning of the path, not the end. You don't ahve to be a hitchhiker per say, but to basically let go of all temporal obligations. Once you do so, all temporal obligations, all possessions, you realize

>you can't

>you're just like a child though. Asking why to everything
Sorry, I'll be more of an adult like you and blindly accept things because they make me feel safe

Because I have discovered objective truth. And I do it using subjective reasoning to remove what is not truth. Using this I have often predicted truth.

>all that bullshit
Diogenes made an argument with his discourse on Plato's 'cupness': You did not.

That is the difference between "clever barb" and "clever argument" you failed to reason here: >Semi-witty insult =/= philosophy.


Go spew bullshit somewhere else, kike.

woa man no need for essays, I didn't read what you said, because I already know you don't believe in anything

sorry bud

>not an argument

it doesn't have to be an argument. Logic is not the highest form of thinking. Anyone who thinks so has become helplessly predictable.

>Why does "stronger" have value?
It will survive.
>What is "pleasant"?
Whatever is desired.
>Why does "pleasant" have value?
Because it is desired.

...

>Because I have discovered objective truth. And I do it using subjective reasoning to remove what is not truth. Using this I have often predicted truth

THIS! There's a reason all great philosophers were also spiritual. The reason is that logic is not the highest form of uncovering truth. It is the highest OBJECTIVE form of discovering truth. Yet the highest truths can only be subjective.

ok?

Oh boy, what makes you say that?

He fails as a philosopher

>science replaces philosophy

which is why he's not good

My dream is to live like Diogenes in a ceramic jar or similar humble structure. Self reliant, and sufficient. Athletic, and free.

I believe the more we surrender to the flow of governance, the worse off we'll be intellectually, and physically. Not to say that governance is bad, but not exploiting your freedom to avoid governance is.

>2 sentences
>essays
Ah, that explains why you have these views. Weirdly however, even though you know nothing, I've learned something from you. Really tickles the noggin.

That's impressive, how did you manage to justify using subjective reasoning as a tool to determine objective truth without resorting to subjective reasoning? Or is circular logic cool?

And all the philosophers the secular nihilistic left holds up as their great thinkers of secularism were not even secular, they were spiritual but a-religious. They were at best agnostic.

I know you don't believe he meant what he said, because what is meaning?

>reasoning
>subjective
There is only faulty reasoning and valid reasoning.

subjective reasoning often leads to an observable truth over time.

Such as the quality of a lullaby and comfort to an anxious baby.

>Socrates was a smelly hobo

Socrates was a respectable family man with a job, a wife, and kids. He just happened to enjoy harassing strangers in the Agora in his free time.

I assume "things surviving" has value because it's desired? What if one person's desire is different from another's? If your answer is that we're equally cool to go about pursuing our desires then fine.

it would be empty without spirituality

my dream is to live on a property that I can cultivate myself with my children

If I were you, I would do the whole diogenes thing while you are still very young, because you will soon realize that poverty is not contingent to a self-sufficient mentality.

You will realize that without your own property, you can't be self sufficient

I have already realized the need for property. I must protect my garden.

I simply meant a humble structure on this property. Also my spirituality should be self evident.

>Plato's theory of forms is "Kike"

Diogenes didn't even make an argument.
He just asked the same question again, which Plato himself admittedly didn't make an argument in response, just a snarky response, because he knew Diogenes knew what he was talking about by "cupness".

I don't know that you know though, so I'll try and explain something that's actually a simple idea to understand. If my explanation isn't good enough, go read up on it. There's plenty of good translations of Plato out there.

The "cup" is made of clay, but what makes it a "cup" and not a "plate" is the "form" the thing has.
Emptyness also has "form" despite being seen to be physically "nothing". This might be argued to be a contradiction, but it's no worse than having a word for something that doesn't physically "exist".

I wasn't accusing you of not having an argument. I appreciated your obversation of the non-logical processes by which edgy teens gravitated towards Nietzsche.

But desu logic is the only correct form of philosophical thinking. Saying otherwise is like saying "emotional intelligence" invalidates IQ. Maybe in some practical applications, but not in the sense of "Intelligence" IQ is referring to, and likewise in this case not in the sense of "thinking" which is meant.
Faith or supernatural revelation isn't the same thing as "thinking", it's something you take into account when thinking that can turn it into something different from logic.

My dream is to live on a private Island in the coldish north, and build my house of solid stone, a library of stone shaped as a pyramid, stone sculptures of myself and other epic events, things that will last for long eras to stand as symbols of my own dedication to ideals

One could say what's the point when all things crumble to nothing? I say just fucking kill yourself then.

I'm not asserting any lack of meaning, I'm simply finding out whether other people's meaning can hold up to the most marginal level of intellectual probing. The answer seems to mostly be no.

I'm not asserting that reasoning is subjective, the other guy did. I'm not asserting anything.

Sounds reasonable enough, I won't pursue an endless line of inquiry as to why you value truth. Enjoy your ceramic jar.

>Emptyness also has "form" despite being seen to be physically "nothing".
You misunderstood it.

Diogenes tried to make Plato see that what he could assign labels didn't necessarily denote existence.

He implies a cup exists because of 'cupness' or 'the idea of its structure' exists before the cup is ever made. Diogenes pops a hole in his line of thinking by confirming though we have a word to describe things that "are not there" (empty) there is no such thing as "emptiness". the barb was when Plato (such as yourself) failed to see the answer, so his skull must be empty.

NIETSZCHE IST GOAT

There's a practical lesson here.

It's "Value the guy who invented the cup."

Diogenes and Nietzche are the only true philosophers. The rest are fluffy sacks of shit who don't even understand their own points and over complicate all issues with nonsense.

Who the fuck honestly cares about "cupness", Plato? Fuck off.

>Is it even possible to be one anymore?

No, it's not possible, you'll be seen as a edgy autistic children.

Stop whinging about useless fucking bullshit. Goddamn. What a waste of time it is to think for hours about why something that's stronger is also better. It is, so it is. Wise men know they don't have time to worry about this stupid nonsense.

I'd argue that Nihilism is only good as perspective, and Stoicism is the truth.

Ok, now rationally justify anything you just said.

Or admit that your thoughts aren't rational. I don't mind which.

Pretty much. Issues of thought now are on politics and economics, enlightenment is needed in those areas.

This.

an edgy autistic child bai pula bleaga

>forms
>seriously thinking about this idea
>not dismissing random bullshit Plato was mumbling about

The form is literally a useless additive. Of course everything has a "form", or ideal shape. Plato wrote an entire novel's worth of shit proving that things have shapes/characteristics/etc. which we generally agree upon, essentially. He also made up some bullshit about there being perfect forms.

Strict rationality is a subverted Jewish prison.

But does he know that?

doamne doamne, da hai ca esti obraznic acuma na

>'the idea of its structure' exists before the cup is ever made
That's true though. The idea of the cup's structure has physical reality as an electrochemical pattern of brain activity, ink on paper, or bits on a computer before the cup has been created. Plato was essentially describing object oriented programming, where you have to define the nature of a thing before the thing can exist.

>implying you should be rational for its own sake
Rationality is a means, not an end. If you waste your time "rationally analyzing" everything it's as dangerous as never being rational. A degree of irrationality allows discrepancy.

Shit, just look at the case studies of people who lose their ability to use emotion. They literally can't make decisions because they're so paralyzed by choice. That's basically what the Aristotelians and Platonists and so on want us to become.

this

every single higher truth can be rationally dismantled. Because rationality is the process of coming at the question from a standpoint of absolutely no knowledge, with an implied audience. All higher truths are subjective. Rationality can only get you so far. It is best for discovering truths that can be shared by everyone.

you can rationally critique and dismantle any truth

rationally justify why your own life matters.

Diogenes doesn't reject the cupness, he rejects the line of thinking that Plato was on that leads to rationalizing emptiness as a form. That's why Plato was put into deep thought when confronted with the emptiness. It's because he hadn't arrived that far in his thinking.

Diogenes is a man who raises the quality of thinking in his peers.

i'd argue that stoicism is void of vital force. Of animus.

diogenes is a meme

and selfish.

if everyone lived diogenes philosophy we would never fill out any higher values.

Slapping on premise and conclusion indicators don't make that nonsensicle word-salad any less fallacious

>When stumped, reference nationality.
No longer stumped?

The truth is that there is no truth and you can decide to do whatever you want. All paths are equally correct (or, really, incorrect) so all paths are fine in the grand scope of the universe. Just do whatever.

That being said, I don't feel so kindly towards people who just say "muh live for happiness" and get on with it. Not just Hedonists, but Aristotle too. There's more to life for happiness. Live for the super-organism that is the nation. That will bring you true fulfillment. Or just believe in God. Either, really.

he's right

you're just too trapped in your logical prison to realize a truth when it slaps you in the face.

pure rationalism IS nihilism.

after years of deliberations the denizens of /fit/ have discovered the secret to building nations

assfucking

nope

you can't say 'there is no truth' and 'the truth it' at the same time.

The truth is that if you think there is no truth then you will be happy with anything because you took yourself out of the eternal struggle of life

and that, my friend, is selfish and cowardly.

>inb4 tries to critique and dismantle my arguement

it's not an argument, it's the truth. Just because you don't believe in truth doesn't mean there is truth. just because you think others 'want' to believe in truth doesn't mean truth doesn't exist.

Argue, then.

no, and anyone who calls themselves a philosopher is a pretentious hack who like the smell of their own farts. in modern times we call philosophy 'common sense'. just talking about shit that could be, and not actually doing anything is absolutely worthless

There are modern philosophers, but, you can only find them in the precarious parts of the world. All other philosophers are complete garbage.

>just talking about shit that could be, and not actually doing anything is absolutely worthless
Good news! Weary soldier of light. The philosophers on Cred Forums are changing the face of politics and the history of the world as we speak!

I'm so glad I could bring you this information. You must feel so relieved.

He fails as a philosopher
because he despises sophistry?

oh god... I replied to a fucking leaf.

thanks for mighty kek neighbour

Much of what was once philosophy is now the realm of science, especially with recent advances in the study of the brain and cosmology. Much like religion, philosophy is being pushed to the sides and corners as the area of verifiable facts increases.

This has some unfortunate side effects, because science can only ever tell us what is, not what should be. There's no functional replacement for the morality system that sustained Western civilization in earlier centuries, because it was all tied up with the more easily disproven sides of Christianity. "Do this or you will burn in hell forever" is a far stronger motivator than "do this or some day some people you've never met will be worse off than they otherwise might have been", even if the real world effects are the same.

>stoicism is the truth because I'm already an autistic robot so can we please just let the one philosophy that agrees with me be the true one?

If there was a truth, it's that all the "rational thinkers" in this world are a waste of human life and die regretting spending their lives worrying about what a bunch of Greek dudes thought.

Philosophy isn't just being pushed to the sides, it's being corrupted by the left. Philosophy is now all about gender theory and shit like that. No one can really match the great thinkers of old, so no one tries.

All current philosophers are trash because only an idiot would major in philosophy these days.

>Are there any legit modern day philosophers out there? Is it even possible to be one anymore?
The Founders studied philosophy.

how many days a month do you trip balls?

They were all about political philosophy though, which is why their system is one of the best. Too bad all the current political philosophers are too busy masturbating to Marx and talking about Anarcho-Cuckoldism.

Same.

you guys need to see my writing-

www.thefoundationpress.com/thefoundationforexploration.html

There are plenty, though you wouldn't think it if you spend most of your time on Cred Forums.

Even on /his/ people will argue Kant and Nietzsche as if they're opinions are really that relevant. Cred Forums is filled with people who barely passed a Bachelor of Arts and did a minor sequence in philosophy, at least that's how it seems.

The cutting edge of every field involves philosophy to a degree. Ph.D literally stands for 'Doctor of Philosophy'.

Philosophy, pure philosophy, is a lot like running: Most people can do it but that doesn't make it easy to be Usain Bolt. These days the top philosophers primarily concern themselves with Philosophy of Mind. The most reasonable theories are actually very weird and very counter-intuitive. Functionalism, for example, is what's accepted by say a computer scientist or neuroscientist. However a pure philosopher is going to analyse the implications of functionalism and conclude that there's no reason to assume the Earth, or the plumbing in your house, doesn't have some form of consciousness because: Why be chauvinistic? What good reason is there to ascribe a property to one set of mechanisms and not to others?

>Listening to philosophy from a freemason
No ty

I'm not sure about political philosophers but as an honours student in the regular kind (BA: Philosophy) I can say most of the professors I speak to are pretty well convinced of social contract theory. A lot of them aren't Marxists, are in fact anti-communism, and believe Hobbes did a pretty good job of describing the role of government and source of codified ethics.

please put a comment-section independent of twitter/facebook/social media.

I prefer to mantain my anonimity when discussing such topics since it has been proved how "heretic" are our worldview.

I don't want to be accused of a though-crime, you know

If there was a truth, then they would have been on to it, seeing as we are living in a nice pristine society, while societies without ideological grounding are not societies, and rather woods shitting savages

>These days the top philosophers primarily concern themselves with Philosophy of Mind.
Like meme magic and holographic symbolism.

ancient greek has no uppercase so his name is spelled "ΔΙΟΓΕΝΗΣ"

Δ is pronounced like th (as in "the"), non-country user got the rest correct more or less

Ancap is literally the progression of enlightenment era philosophy. It's the same conclusion they would have reached had they lived another hundred years

If one has a comfortable neet-life, what rational argument is there to be made against nihilism?

>No modern philosophy is a joke
So, all modern philosophy is serious?

you sound like you like benis

David Chalmers
John Searle
Peter Sloterdijk

I'm mentioning just a few, doesn't mean I agree with their stuff. Most of them are old goobers from a different generation and they're not particularly connected to current events.

>Would you listen to a smelly hobo who masturbates in public
You listen to Trump

>This is where the modern day philosopher's meet

Early Stefan Molyneux, way back when he still did videos in his car, was probably the best philosopher of our time. Todays altright clickbait videos are another story though.

>what is the iron pill?
Self-improvement

I'm pretty sure that is already happening. Look at the alt-right and where that is at the moment. It is in this weird proto-theory state where people are still trying to figure out exactly what it is.

Nietzsche literally says that Socrates was a degenerate, he says those words. He took a Greek world which was obsessed with strength, life and worldly affairs and took it into a more strictly rationalist worldview which in the long term, caused it to turn to oriental mysticism.

>just another average radical-atheist

which does not mean that he is not valuable to society


stop drinking the nihilistic cool aid

>People like to think that you can gain the ultimate mind by doing so, but you get bored with it just as you are bored with your current life.

your brain is in constant hyperactivity thanks to the high stimulus environment (porn,videogames,drugs,music,traffic etc.) which is why mundane things start to bore you to death.
the only way out is meditation but then the city life becomes unberable.

Oh no i denounce it
But deep down i know its true

yes, now I recall that experiment with rats overstimulating theirselves

> Rats will perform lever-pressing at rates of several thousand responses per hour for days in order to obtain direct electrical stimulation of the lateral hypothalamus.[

> Multiple studies have demonstrated that rats will perform reinforced behaviors at the exclusion of all other behaviors.

> Experiments have shown rats to forgo food to the point of starvation in order to work for brain stimulation or intravenous cocaine when both food and stimulation are offered concurrently for a limited time each day.

> Rats will even cross electrified grids to press a lever, and they are willing to withstand higher levels of shock to obtain electrical stimulation than to obtain food.

> mfw I sit in a bulb and cannot escape

youtube.com/watch?v=a_I94dWg0p0

>You must refine skill.

Thankfully the "uneducated rednecks" will win the "philosophical" commies on the day of the rope because of this.

>ghost

Co to mialo znaczyc niby?

(checked)

a co taki ciekawy? znaczenie jest subiektywne

yeah
they're just called mathematicians

Thomas Sowell

guy gets paid to do whatever he wants, which mostly is thinking about economic and political fallacy.

that guy is fucking high on his own supply

that said he has some interesting points.

he uses way too much pretentious language though.

how come you are always right?

I am afraid one day they will kick mathematicians out too.

what are you talking about ahmed?

link to something you don't like then.

If Jedi can be an official British religion, why not Kek?

this faggot is a pretentious intellectual who loves to uses latin to say simple shit.

that's not philosophy, that's pretension.

thank you

>in modern times we call philosophy 'common sense'
'Common sense' is mostly a mix of ideological newspeak and bullshit.