Let's talk about Philosophy Sup Forums!

Let's talk about Philosophy Sup Forums!
>Who are your favorite philosophers?
>What is the meaning of life?
>Does the material world really exist? Or is it merely the filtration of another realm of ideals?
>Are there alternatives to the lifestyles we're currently leading?
>How does one deal with the inevitability of death?
>Does anything happen after we die?

Sartre, Nietzsche and Popper.
To pass on your genes. Msc in Biology, so I can´t give another answer.
Doesn´t matter.
There definetly are, but we are too weak to be able to embrace them.
Death is a mere construct. Once you wake up without having fallen asleep and once you fall asleep without waking. But since only your own consciouness is what makes everything real for you, it doesn´t matter as soon as die consciouness disperses. Furthermore if infinite universes exist (no matter if at the same time or in a row) this also means you are immortal, since inevitably everything will be the same as it has been in your life, every atom and every molecule, the whole histroy of the world, leading again to the existence of your personal consciouness. Therefore death does not exist.

the meaning of life.... is up to you to decide it. it is your prospective of the exsittence.
material world dos not exist. when you touch a object its a electrial signal that is translated thought several processors. it can always be wrong.
medation to try to leave the "physical" and intressed in the the electrical.
death is just the process between this and the next. can your engery live without a body or disapate?
after death its up to you, do you go back to the socail concesness?

>Sartre, Nietzsche
You have to be over 18 to be here, mate

Terence Mckenna and Alan Watts.
To learn, reproduce and die.
Doesnt matter.
Of course.
Meditation.
No one knows, but i like to believe that we lose all connection to matteriallism and become one with our spirit and float through space endlessly.

I like the existentialist like Emerson and the realists/pragmatists like Twain. Kierkegaard has to be my favorite tho. Existential Nihilism is the way to go imo...

>Who are your favorite philosophers?
Marx, Kant, Plato, Heidegger, Marcus Aurelius. Recently I've been looking into Lao Tzu
>What is the meaning of life?
The purpose of life is living.
>Does the material world really exist? Or is it merely the filtration of another realm of ideals?
I'm not so sure. I think Heidegger gets it right: the ideal is embedded within the material itself; the separation is false one.
>Are there alternatives to the lifestyles we're currently leading?
Should capitalism ever fall, then I think we could finally get the chance to do what humans all ought to do: discuss the nature of being and appreciate that strange thing that is existence.
>How does one deal with the inevitability of death?
It's fruitless worrying about it. Death can (and will) come at any time; why worry about something you ultimately have no control over? The best way to come to terms with death is to live life as best as one can.
>Does anything happen after we die?
I have serious doubts. If there is, I don't think it'd be anything similar to the way we experience the world now.

S T O I C I S M
T
O
I
C
I
S
M

Epicurus, Diogenes
None
Shiiet we mathematical holograms now
Repeal and Replace corporate cronyism pls
"Death is nothing to us, since when we are death has not yet come, and when death has come we are not."

>I'm my favorite philosopher
>the meaning of life is that which is living (keyword LIVING)
>for all intesnive purposes it does, but its not really there
>yes there are alternatives which make this look like a slave colony(because it is)
>by knowing it is an illusion
>you don't.

Wow. What talent *you* have.

I like Ayn Rand. I'm an objectivist.

You are an underage fuck

I am 23.

>jumping straight into meaning of "x"
>not speaking of meaning itself
>humoring dualism
>humoring life after death
Jesus, terrible bait.

>I don't know enough of them to say
>To find knowledge in search of the answer to that question. At the least to not throw it away just because you don't know
>The material world exists but it isn't all the there is, not even close. It is a filtration and yet has qualities all on it's own.
>By valuing their time alive and by recognizing that death is likely just the next step
>I firmly believe that death isn't the entire end of it, because I don't believe this world is solely material. I have no idea what might happen after though, or what might actually be reality.

But doesn't objectivism basically undermine itself in Capitalism by destroying social mobility? It seems to suffer the same issues as Anarcho-Capitalism.

They're just broad questions to get conversation flowing user. I know the questions in themselves propose ideologies.

>23
>got dubs of 22

My bad. Then you simply are an idiot.

dubs of truth

>meaning of life
>to pass on your genes.

shitty meme answer with no thought put into it.
if life has no inherent meaning, then how can stretching the process into eternity give meaning?

The fact that living things are driven to continue the existence of life to me is another reason a purpose must exist

>Who are your favorite philosophers?
Spinoza, Socrates, and Sartre. because they started it for me.
>What is the meaning of life?
What ever you make of it. So experience.
>Does the material world really exist? Or is it merely the filtration of another realm of ideals?
Does matter exist in the way we observe it? Sure I believe that matter exists and that there is Truth out there. But will we ever be able to observe it? No, We will forever make models of reality unless we become god self.
>Are there alternatives to the lifestyles we're currently leading?
Don't even start. How many possible universes are there? Perhaps we are all living those realities in parallel universes.
>How does one deal with the inevitability of death?
I don't know. I usually cower away when that fear comes for me and truth be told it still to this day haunts me. But it doesn't change anything so after a while I just keep going.
>Does anything happen after we die?
Depends on what you think of as I. I for me just consist of matter and energy. So that matter and energy will continue to follow the laws of nature.

diogenes is the greatest meme of all time
There is no ulterior meaning to life besides whar you put into it
The material world exists, but we will never know exactly how it is due to our own limitations in perception
There are always alternatives, but they're not necessarily preferable to our current life styles
The only way to deal with death is to distract oneself by finding meaning in life
After we die, nothing comprehensible to human understanding happens to our consciousness.

but procreating is not the purpose then

>> Plato, Diogenes, Buddha

>> There's no inherent meaning, you come up with your own for your life

>> It does, but what we perceive is just an illusion that arises from how our brains/mind interpret the world - therefore reality is probably very different than what we think it is

>> Sure why not, human beings have always been adapting, circumstances change, as do the way we conduct our lives - but certain things will remain pretty much the same..like basic morality.

>> Accept the fact that with life comes death. They're not separate, it's the same thing - a coin with two different sides. To not die, one must not be born. However, what we think of as life & death are simply concepts that we have created in our heads because of our limited understanding and perception.

>> maybe. But you as an identity/self will no longer be there, therefore you can't experience what comes after what we perceive and call death. I'd like to think some form of consciousness continues, but to be really rational, I think perhaps there's no more consciousness after - just energy, broken down, simplified and recycled

Any Zizek fans here? Pervert's Guide to Ideology is what got me into philosophy at all

>Who are your favorite philosophers?
Nietzsche, some Germans, some French etc. etc.
>What is the meaning of life?
Meanings are secondary to biological will to life and should be treated as ornamental aesthetics of existence, which is ultimately meaningless.
>Does the material world really exist? Or is it merely the filtration of another realm of ideals?
how can things exist "really" or "not so really"? If it exists, that's enough.
>Are there alternatives to the lifestyles we're currently leading?
These are not lifestyles, rather these are different styles of avoiding life. The sole understanding is enough, and all kinds of aesthetics can be found there, at the point of understanding (they are inevitably, necessarily there in a form of all meanings of mankind) as long as you have cultivated your ground. Moral or esthetical codes ('lifestyles') without the ground are second-rate, for the ground, the innermost Earth is not accessible via outward codes, only when civilizations die these codes are held in high regard, which means: the reign of good people, viz.: groundless people, turned-inside-out people, average people, the good being the nemesis of the best people. Not that I wish to condemn them or anyone.
>How does one deal with the inevitability of death?
Most people haven't yet realized the inevitability of life..
>Does anything happen after we die?
I hope this sun, and moon, and stars, and trees go on after I die. Moreover, I even know this.

Zizek is incredibly interesting, I used to listen to him a lot back when I liked mutualism.

Grow up

yes, he's interesting.
Also, communism is criminally misunderstood, both by communists and their opponents.
It's destined to reemerge in this century.

You're confused with Socialism. Communism is doomed in its unrealistic understanding of economy and human behavior.

>diogenes is the greatest meme of all time

He's up there for sure but have you considered Ikkyu

What don't you like about Zizek? I find his critiques of ideology incredibly enlightening and often humorous.

>human nature arguement
Oh boy. Communism seems to make the same assumptions about human nature that Capitalism does.

Yea I was just sharing my thoughts, not disagreeing. Im not the user that said spreading your genes is the meaning of life.

Mckenna and Watts.

>unrealistic understanding of economy and human behavior.
This is capitalism par excellence
And new "realism" is cancer of today's philosophy, slowly killing it in behalf of capitalist realism. Socialists are worse than the most rampant capitalists and most utopian communists, and ultimately must be eliminated as such, as a notion and a false hope.

Mark Fisher was right once again. Capitalists and non-capitalists alike have taken the current situation as human nature and inevitable.

What's the most depressing philosophy book you've ever read?
Pic related for me, made me fucking despise my life under capitalism.

Diogenes
by the way, can you spare some change?

any post-60s Frenchman is depressing, and rightfully so

Philosophy is for idiots, too inept to get involved in real issues.

True. But still, I think DeBord takes the cake.

Look at this man and laugh.

owo u r soooo intelligent, may i engage in this circlejerk??

The war bankrupted us and made us America's little bitch.

>thinking is for losers
>lol philosophy don't affect anything

You fucking jackoff, you're the one who's trying to be soooo intelligently sarcastic here, it's obvious you've just heard some big French post-modernist names and decided to comment in a snarky manner, but unfortunately you're not coherent enough to see that I didn't express any admiration for these people.

>>for all intesnive purposes it does,

it's intents, as in, I intend to go to the glory hole today so that OP can suck my dick.

no. Im not even trying to be a shitposter, but I grew out of him.

>Also, communism is criminally misunderstood

no it isnt. It isnt even remotely as interesting or complex as its adherents pretend it is. I also dont take this statement, which I see often, seriously at all considering these are the same exact people who claim Fascism is Capitalism

>interesting or complex
It's not supposed to be "interesting" or "complex". That's why communism is criminally misunderstood. By you, it seems, too.

Does Socrates remind anyone else of Orson Welles?

user, when you claim something is misunderstood, you are claiming its complex. Its not, its delusional utopian memes developed by some middle class retard who couldn't even handle personal finance

Please explain filosofol anons, is there such thing as free will?

>Diogenes
>We are brought into existence from nothingness, Our existence ends, We make the most of what is in between, back to nothingness
>Who gives a fuck?
>Yes a perfect world where we are all high functioning psychopaths, or super empaths, you choose.
>As previously stated meaning of life, who gives a fuck?
>No
>

your critique of me is a social construct, therefore I will not listen to it LALALALALALALALALALA

nice strawman

It doesn't matter. Even if all we are is the mere playing out of physical properties caused by the big bang, we still experience existence as though we have free will. If there is no free will, then it's meaningless talking about its implications.

>Alan Watts
Love this guy, such a shame he died in his late 50's and I still find it amazing that only now because of the internet he has become extremely mainstream, even with being dead over 50 years.

thats not what a strawman is user. Literally every single implementation of Marxs idea has failed miserably.

> Heidegger, Nietzsche, Camus, Wittgenstein
> te revolt against the absurdity of existence. To say yes to life, even though it is blistered with pains and horrors
> i don't think we're able to ever solve this one because we can never escape seeing the world through human perspective
> yes
>embrace life = embrace death
>we usually get buried etc

>Literally every single implementation of Marxs idea has failed miserably.
Dead wrong. Labor Unions, nationalized healthcare, and Scandinavian "Socialism" are all great examples of Marxist influenced institutions that have worked. Not to mention that Marxist theory has done wonders for academia.

And the reasons that the USSR and China failed is because they weren't industrialized nations. Communism requires Capitalist infrastructure in place to function; neither of those countries met those conditions.

the meaning of life is 42

The meaning of life varies greatly with both age and person but I currently believe the meaning of life itself is empathy.

I'll leave that here for you guys to think about and argue within yourself. Never argue about the meaning of life with outside forces as it had no place there.

Thank you.

>Dubček

kek

none of those memes in that image worked though user. This shit might work in small hippie communes, if you can tolerate the cult leader fucking your wife and children, but in reality, central planning

>And the reasons that the USSR and China failed is because they weren't industrialized nations.
no, its because they followed retarded communist policies. Mao is the worst leader of the 20th century

That's your idea, not mine. When I claim it is misunderstood, I am claiming it's simple, like all truly great things.

>Who are your favorite philosophers?
Heraclitus, Camus

>What is the meaning of life?
This is purely subjective.

>Does the material world really exist? Or is it merely the filtration of another realm of ideals?
It doesn't matter.

>Are there alternatives to the lifestyles we're currently leading?
Of course. Every choice has an alternative.

>How does one deal with the inevitability of death?
By dying and thus no longer aware that one's awareness will someday end.

>Does anything happen after we die?
The universe carries on without having even noticed our existence.

Allende was amazing until imperialist forces shot him.
>no, its because they followed retarded communist policies. Mao is the worst leader of the 20th century
They followed retarded non-Marxist policies to create capitalist infrastructure in a pre-Capitalist context. Marx literally says you need Capitalism for Communism. Communism and Socialism are nothing more than advanced, efficient, and humane Capitalism.

Capitalism
>Creates abundance of waste and excess
>Creates arbitrary and meaningless class divisions
>Pits man against man for the sake of commodity
>Can feed everyone

Communism
>Workers seize wasteful means of production
>Produce enough for everyone
>Class divisions are destroyed
>Man is united with Man
>Can feed everyone

God you sound like a pleb. It's good that you're interested in philosophy, but when you ask retarded questions like "what is the meaning of life?" and "does anything happen after we die?" it really shows how little you understand about philosophy.

Enlighten us then user, what questions ARE worth asking?

I've just recently started reading more about Stoicism and it's incredible, the Stoic philosophy is literally exactly what I have thought and believed for my entire adult life, and I never knew there was a concrete philosophy built around these principals.

You read Marcus Aurelius yet? I also recommend Stoner by John Williams, probably the best stoic narrative I've ever found

Questions that are actually possible for us to answer, for starters.
Also, actual philosophical issues are more specific. Things like mind-body dualism, the problem of consciousness, specific ethical dilemmas, things like that.
"What is the meaning of life" and "what happens after we die" aren't philosophical questions, they're religious questions. If you want answers to those, find a religion you like. But as I said before, we can't actually answer those questions so I don't see any point in asking them.

Ever read this guy?

I decided to start with Seneca, just bought a copy of his letters the other day. I wanted to go in somewhat chronological order, so I planned on reading Seneca, Epictetus, and then Marcus Aurelius.

Might come off as a retarded faggot but idgaf
>Who are your favorite philosophers?
i had a phase where i was fascinated with the subject along with metaphysics and anything occult related because history is a really complex thing on it's own that leads you down in a bunch of paths
>What is the meaning of life?
i'd argue that it's a subjective question in nature but if i'd have to answer i'd say that there is none or if there is one then i have my own speculations about it
>Does the material world really exist? Or is it merely the filtration of another realm of ideals?
Some scientists have been proving that all of this ''reality'' is a really complex simulation and i have my own ''farfetched'' perspectives on it but matter in it's definition is densified vibration and everything is energy, the answer lies beyond that.. Our brains are simply an interface to this ''world'' we live day to day that acts like a transmitter
>Are there alternatives to the lifestyles we're currently leading?
It's safe to bet that yes is the only answer but unfortunately most of the world isn't ready to evolve past the cultural enslavement that leads us to where we are at atm
>How does one deal with the inevitability of death?
That none of this really matter(no pun intended)
>Does anything happen after we die?
Who knows and why does it matter?

He's mostly mediocre, derivative and bland, but has really funny moments:
>For those very same people who brandish Teutonic tin swords that have been fashioned carefully according to ancient models and wear padded bear-skins, with the horns of oxen mounted over their bearded faces, proclaim that all contemporary conflicts must be decided by the weapons of the mind alone. And thus they skedaddle when the first communist cudgel appears. Posterity will have little occasion to write a new epic on these heroic gladiators.

>Schopenhauer and Socrates
> I belieave it's explorations the fact that there is a huge unknown to be known
>It does and it's important because without it there wouldn't be ideas since there wouldn't be any consciousness to influence.
>I believe it's live in order to die cause that's the destination we are going for so why not live for a perfect death. Also the idea of will isn't wrong here (live in order to purpose)
>I will live forever through my will. Only my consciousness will disappear.
>loss of consciousness and ego

Fuck my grammar

>What is the meaning of life?
Our burden is to carry the question, to carry on a long term search as a species while each one of us is made to see himself as a protagonist, there are never certainties, we destroyed those we think we had between the end of the 19th century and 20th, without replacing them, we know more but is never enough, and thus the fight goes on, why? It feels good, a couple of drugs being released by our bodies are what make up happyness, which is never stable, not even a lottery winner is always happy.

We cannot reach stability, the life of the 21th century is too fast, even our surroundings are replaced at such speed and to such extent that makes you wonder if even houses one day might not change like smartphones do, but why are we like this? Of course it is an advantage, it motivates you to keep going, but why? I don't know, but I like it. If there is no inherent meaning you can either give up or give it yourself, freedom.

>Does anything happen after we die?
I am certain there is no reincarnation because if I did not remember the present moment I would not be conscious, those night that I woke up and had to be told about it, it was like I was not alive during them, thus there is no reincarnation because they should not be able to remember their past life.

>Are there alternatives to the lifestyles we're currently leading?
Always.

>Does the material world really exist? Or is it merely the filtration of another realm of ideals?
We never "touch" things (Source: Cosmos reboot), this is what we call material world, there might be more to it, testament being that "black matter" thing which seems to make up most of the universe but we don't know what is it, thing is, just like people say "I did not dream" when one always does, is just a convention and a matter of semantics.

>Popper
I feel like there are still too many scientists that ignore the principle of falsification, such a shame, they just want to prove themselves right.

>What is the meaning of life?
To live peacefully and discuss its meaning, of course.

>"Death is nothing to us, since when we are death has not yet come, and when death has come we are not."
I have not agreed with this for a while now.
I would answer to this "Would you like to be no more now or later though?" Because that's the problem, people want to be, they don't know what death is but they are certain that they will be separated by the people you love, and that is equivocally SOMETHING.

Like is ultimately how we perceive it to me. How we see things and how we feel things are restricted to the confines of our mind. How are mind can translate imaginary signals to our brains so we can better understand the world around us.

But, if there is nothing after death, you won't be able to experience being detached from those you love. You fall asleep and become unconscious every night, yet few of us are afraid to sleep.
People want to be, but to be nothing is meaningless and being-less.

I don't think people fear death, people fear dying.

Someone told me on / lit/ it was "the trouble with being born" by Cioran, but I could not even read it, it seemed too disconnected and I don't think he was convincing or coherent enough to make a point.

>Who are your favorite philosophers?
Nietzsche
>What is the meaning of life?
In my opinion you are the one that has to give a meaning to it. Also life is like a big test.
>Does the material world really exist? Or is it merely the filtration of another realm of ideals?
I don't touch that topic
>Are there alternatives to the lifestyles we're currently leading?
There must be some ways.
>How does one deal with the inevitability of death?
You don't have to deal with it personally, cowards make religions so that they can deal with it together.
>Does anything happen after we die?
I don't think that you ever gonna feel like you are dead, maybe you go to a parallel universe or something, no idea either.

Anti-natalism is the worst meme. Kant already solved it and you're better off not reading it.

>But, if there is nothing after death, you won't be able to experience being detached from those you love
This is a very common, yet very unnecessary thing that humans do. We let things in the future cause us distress in the present. It's completely illogical, yet it's how our minds work. Many people will feel stressed for days before they have a doctor/dentist appointment that they don't want to go to, just dreading it even though it isn't currently happening to them. It's one of the downsides of foresight, and one of the reasons why it's so important to practice and strive to live in the moment.

I agree. Heidegger and Mindfulness are the GOAT

>they don't know what death is

We were all dead for 13 billion years and it didn't hurt.

Like an ancient woman in hospice once said, "I'm not afraid to die, I'm afraid of dying."

>Assuming someone's age by the philosophers he/she cares about, nice.

> you won't be able to experience being detached from those you love.
That's egocentric, people will feel pain for you loss. That's a responsibility you hold personally, because no man is an island, we are social animals, we are someone else friend, relative, son, worker and so on.
>You fall asleep and become unconscious every night, yet few of us are afraid to sleep.
I like sleeping and I enjoy it, death is the opposite.

>and strive to live in the moment.
Foresight is underrated in many fields, economic failures are often led by people who can't or won't think ahead, they steal to make a bit more money today, not realizing that they are damaging a system that benefit them too.


I studied, but not read Kant, what does it say about that subject in particular?

That does not make sense to me user, you will have to explain it again, that phrase is a repetition for me, see attached image.

How can we live peacefully if every conquest is through the resolution of a conflict of some kind? Medicine, Military, Transports, ecc, they all seek to solve problems, we are all wicked, riddled with problems there is no peace.

>That's egocentric, people will feel pain for you loss. That's a responsibility you hold personally, because no man is an island, we are social animals, we are someone else friend, relative, son, worker and so on.
It's only egocentric if you're responsible for your own death. If you die, of course it's going to be sad for those left behind, but that's no fault of your own. The fear of death, then, isn't for yourself, isn't about actually being dead, but rather for those who care about you.

>I like sleeping and I enjoy it, death is the opposite.
I love sleeping too, but I even enjoy those nights where I don't seem to dream; I don't really experience anything. Not to say it's exactly the same as being totally dead, but it's similar. My only point was that, if death is literally nothing, the absence of being, then there is nothing to be feared. The only thing that ought to be feared the actual process of dying, if you're unlucky enough to die painfully, and not enjoy it.

Kant's response to Anti-Natalists are that the unborn don't get to decide whether or not they want to live. Not being born removes the possibility of choice of the unborn. For Kant, to assume that choice for them is immoral.

>How can we live peacefully if every conquest is through the resolution of a conflict of some kind? Medicine, Military, Transports, ecc, they all seek to solve problems, we are all wicked, riddled with problems there is no peace.
They're all issues of class and scarcity. The first step would be to develop a world-wide system that addresses these two problems. Communism is unironically one answer, not that we should derail the thread into political shit.

>Foresight is underrated in many fields, economic failures are often led by people who can't or won't think ahead, they steal to make a bit more money today, not realizing that they are damaging a system that benefit them too.
True, but there's a difference between preparing for the future, and allowing future events to impact your happiness in the present. Preparing for the future is definitely a good thing, at least to an extent.

This is actually a good thread, wow Sup Forums

bump

Even with scarcity resolved, life is reduced to problem solving, anyone work exists to satisfy a need/solve a problem. Conflict is inherent in humanity and inevitable I think, this sort of idea of conflict.

Oh well, alright then is different.

Most people don't spend their life fearing death, that's being full blown paranoid but people are reasonable afraid of dying because of the mentioned reasons, maybe it might as well have been said "To live just to escape from death, is death itself" or something like that.
>Kant's response to Anti-Natalists are that the unborn don't get to decide whether or not they want to live. Not being born removes the possibility of choice of the unborn. For Kant, to assume that choice for them is immoral.
Nice, thanks.