Let's discuss this image. I saw it in another thread, but by the time I could reply, the post was archived

Let's discuss this image. I saw it in another thread, but by the time I could reply, the post was archived.

It is easier to receive ill-gotten gains or to disobey morals than to adhere to principle and work hard.

To err is to learn, I agree, but it is worthless if you do not learn.

>The strength of a nation derives from the integrity of the home.
I think this is referencing strong family values defining communities, towns, cities, and the nation.
Strength is power, authority to control, ability to decide.
A nation is the collective identity of a people, the flag which the citizens salute defines the nation.
Integrity is honesty, loyalty, and virtue.
A home is, I think, referencing the family unit.
They are desirable because they provide the most desirable outcomes, they are the natural consequences of having children (raise the kids in a strong family to ensure the best results). Pretty straightforwards stuff.

>The superior man thinks always of honour; the common man thinks of comfort.
I think this is related to the first bit about working hard for your worth.
Honour is the ability to sleep comfortably knowing you are an honest and trustworthy person, someone who is willing to die for something.
It is defined by the individual and the societies they live in. There are trends to be noticed in regards to honour. For example, selfish people are not very honourable. This is because they are not willing to sacrifice, they lack foresight, they are hedonists, etc. Inferior behaviour lacks honour. An honourable person is superior because their character demands respect, not scorn, because they work hard for it, to establish their reputation.
I don't know what comfort is referencing, maybe laziness.
I don't think it means common people are bad; rather, that the gap between good and great is one defined by 'x'.

Fuck it's like highschool sophomore philosophy all over again.
Good job op, you know how to define words

...

I don't know, I just wanted to see what others thought about the image. That's all.

Inquiry was useful up to the discovery of the scientific method.
After that objectivity was the domain of science, and so philosophy become suicidal, as evidenced by the state of the west.

The east asians got really lucky, they self-selected for intelligence, obedience and ethnocentrism for millenium and still got the scientific method thank to europeans.

1. Bad means deviating from social norms/against expectations, which means no inhibitions
2. to err is to not speak truth, truth is ALWAYS desirable
3. implying stability isn't desirable
4. comfort means complacency, honor means upholding standards and improving upon them,

Good point.
Also an interesting point. The inquisitive nature of the Western man is not only his greatest advantage, but his downfall. It leads to moral relativism, if left unchecked.

Also good summarization. Thanks.

Nikola Tesla was no Donald Trump, just ask George Washington. Sun Tzu was building railroads for Americans.

eastern wisdom>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> western (((philosophy)))

I was born in East LA, sherlock holmes

Eastern philosophy for the most part was tied to mysticism. Western philosophy was broken out of that by the ancient Greeks, which lead to proper dialectics and logical reasoning, things which eastern philosophy almost always lacks in even a primitive form.

The Confucians, unlike the Buddhists and Hindus, did manage to break free from mysticism. But logic remained underdeveloped and dialectic conversations and arguments almost always made horrendous use of fallacious techniques. East Asian philosophy is riddled with weak allegories serving as arguments. Not that western philosophy is entirely devoid of this, Plato's republic is full of the same shit. But over the years westerners caught on that argument from analogy is often deceptive.

It's not that eastern philosophy was 'wrong', it's just that it failed to develop further like philosophy did in the west.

>Literally critical theory
Asking for definitions of simple concepts isn't an argument, it's a prelude to an argument. You know perfectly well what all of those words mean.

Command that aryan to ask you another question and put him through his paces

>""""""""wisdom""""""""

Yeah, that's why they were some +400 years behind technologically when the British Empire showed up.

Are you the same type of moron who thinks katanas are anything but garbage?

I didn't even know that faking merchandise was a thing until I read about Hong Kong

That's what I said, the inquisitive nature of the Western man can be his greatest advantage, and his deepest pitfall (when applied to questioning objective fact and denying reason over emotion, like gender, tradition, marriage, respect for others, etc.)

continued

From the little eastern philosophy I've read (Confucian commentaries mostly), I can assure you that over 90% of it is this sort of worthless drivel.

>Man is water
>life is river
>Such is life

>God is dog
>Man is bone
>One day dog will bury bone

>The world is anus
>Man is shit
>Such is life

Such analogies, when used in western philosophy, for the most part only serve as a comparison to help the reader understand after they've laid down their reasoning, like an example in a textbook. In eastern philosophy it's just allegories, one after the fucking other. It oftentimes reads like they're writing poetry, not philosophy.

people here talking like they studied confucius

>The world is anus
>Man is shit
>Such is life
fuckin hell lol

good. enjoy your downfall westerner

American software got us to the moon and back and NASA couldn't hire enough Ashkenazi Jewish talent. That's why American football has a quarterback and his name is Russell Wilson. He plays for the Seattle Seahawks.

...

AND DA SEACHICKENS ARE GONNA WIN DA SUPERB OWL AGAIN

As a Chinese (a fucking leaf), I completely agree.

I think it's due to language. Alphabets and letters are so much easier to manipulate, break down and piece together, and thus more conducive to the scientific method and the logical thinking it entails. Chinese is extremely clunky and hard to work with in comparison.

t. Westernized, generic piece of shit who can't into his mother tongue