420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
A subject is required when posting a new thread
Subject
Comment
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich

penis pump

Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
Stoicsm by Isabella Nickledale - Sat, 07 May 2016 21:31:10 EST ID:KwTwX1YG No.205905 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1462671070789.jpg -(57761B / 56.41KB, 460x318) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 57761
How does one truly put stoicism to practice?
>>
William Woffingworth - Sun, 08 May 2016 12:00:01 EST ID:1iJ/Y3fp No.205908 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I don't know.
But I bought The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius and plan on reading it soon.
>>
Emma Sebblechadge - Mon, 09 May 2016 00:49:39 EST ID:SdJ2BE4b No.205914 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205905
distance yourself from society
>>
Caroline Gedgefuck - Mon, 09 May 2016 14:28:07 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205921 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Do you really want to be a Stoic?
Why not be a Cynic? Seems more fun.

Dude, don't be a Stoic. All of the Ancient Greek philosophy schools are dope as shit, but none of them are perfect.

But here's a rule of thumb; don't let your emotions rule you, but don't shy away from things that feel right to you just because others disagree with them, regulate your happiness so you don't overdose on dopamine, and realize that nothing is good/bad but always in-between, literally everything, and that good choices can result in bad things happening, and vice versa. And stop taking so many things for granted. You and I and everyone here take a lot for granted. The less you take for granted, the happier you'll be, but the less driven you'll be to gain more.

That being said, all of this is easier said than done and requires practice and conditioning, trial and error.
>>
The Fool !oj3475yHBQ - Wed, 11 May 2016 18:10:32 EST ID:G2LMnx/t No.205933 Ignore Report Quick Reply
To understand Stoicism one should ask the question: How does one truly put oneself into practice?

Stoicism is IMO the true heart and intent of philosophy. It is the application of reason to all things, so that one may live in reason by reason.

Ugh, though one should not think any school is any heart, as the categorization of philosophies into "schools" is ludicrous, and leads people into believing there are great differences between true philosophers, when in reality we share the same spirit; as a single transcendental mind interacting with reality through our individual parts.

Through the ages, Stoicism has procured a public reputation as a school which concerns itself with the the concealment of ones emotions and intentions. This misconception arises from the consequences of applying reason to ones interactions with others, for there are many situations in which the highest virtue calls for a concealment of ones thoughts to prevent a negative effect on others... but I digress.

Stoicism is the art of cultivating Free-will; the understanding of who we are, and what we have the power to change.

To me this is the highest goal anyone can aim for, and is a subject which is central to almost all great works of philosophy. From Kant, Nietzsche, and Schopenhauer, to Plato and Aristotle, all concern themselves with the application of reason to the art of living. To use the words of someone who truly "got" my posts, "It is about attaining spiritual sovereignty over deterministic forces."

BTW good timing on the thread OP, as I've recently been juggling Kant and Epictetus. The latter being an extremely potent yet bitter medicine.To give you a better Idea of what has been categorized into the school of "Stoicism" I'll drop some quotes I've saved. So you have some background... Epictetus was a Grecian Roman slave who was eventually freed, and became one of the founders of what is considered the "Stoic" school. Marcus Aurelius admits in his Meditations that discovering of the discourses of Epictetus had the single greatest influence on his intellectual development...and for a Roman Emperor to openly admit that the biggest influence in his life was a Greek slave, is huge. Without further delay, please enjoy these small tidbits of Epictetus's Discourses.

>Our mind cannot be forced to believe what is false, nor our will compelled to love something that makes it unhappy.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
The Fool !oj3475yHBQ - Fri, 13 May 2016 00:20:04 EST ID:G2LMnx/t No.205950 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1463113204029.png -(597605B / 583.60KB, 1000x1500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>205933
>It seems we would rather study anything than how to remain free and unenslaved.

>Philosophers speak in paradoxes, and what of the other arts -- are they different? What is more paradoxical than cutting into a persons eye to restore their vision. If someone suggested this procedure to someone ignorant of medicine, they would laugh in the practitioners face... little wonder then, if many of the truths of philosophy also impress the masses as paradoxical.

>This is the beginning of philosophy, -- an awareness of ones own mental fitness. Consciousness of its weakness will keep you from talking difficult subjects. As it is though, some people strain at a pamphlet and still want to devour an entire treatise. Naturally they can't digest it, and get heartily sick of the whole business. They need to first figure out what their capacity is. In the realm of logic it is easy to refute someone ignorant of a subject. But in the affairs of life no one offers themselves to be examined, and whomever presumes to examine us we resent. Yet Socrates used to say that the unexamined life was not worth living.

>When did anger ever teach someone to play music or pilot a ship? Do you imagine that your anger is going to help teach me the far more complex business of life? I know of a man who cried, clinging to Epaphroditus' knees saying how miserable he was now that he was down to his last million... and what did Epaphroditus do -- laugh at him as you are laughing now? No, he was appalled, and said "dear man, how did you keep silent up till now? How have you endured it?"

>If i cherish my body, I make a slave of myself, if I cherish my property, I make a slave of myself; Because I've disclosed the means to make me captive. When a snake pulls back its head, right away I think "hit it just there, on the part it is protecting." In the same way you may be sure that whatever you are seen to protect, that will become your enemy's focus of attack. Keep this in mind, then there will be no one you will need to fear or flatter.

>Remember that it is we who torment, we who make difficulties for ourselves -- that is, our opinions do. What for instance does it mean to be insulted? Stand by a rock and insult it, and what have accomplished? If someone responds to insult like a rock, what has the abuser gained with his invective? If however, he has his victim's weakness to exploit, then his efforts are worth while.

>Produce a person who can get the better of someone whose judgments are superior. You can't, though try as you might. This is gods law and nature's: "let the best man win" But "best" in his area of expertise.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.


Cultural appropriation by Phoebe Papperham - Sat, 07 May 2016 14:56:59 EST ID:NSNH98hj No.205899 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1462647419850.jpg -(12407B / 12.12KB, 180x180) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 12407
I've lately heard a lot about the injustices of cultural appropriation.

What if being born into a certain culture or ethnicity endowed you with tradeable permits for the use of certain cultural artifacts? You could then sell or rent these permits for use by people in other cultures and ethnicities. No longer you would have to worry about the hipster with the keffiyeh as you'd know that he is paying for the right to wear it!
7 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Nigel Mecklenet - Tue, 10 May 2016 04:34:40 EST ID:SHGsCWKc No.205926 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1462869280943.jpg -(183668B / 179.36KB, 780x770) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>205917
>minorities whom are highly racist
Bahahaha, the only thing better than people saying "whom" is people using it wrong.
>I hold nothing as sacred, and it offends a lot of people, and I'm OK with that because their offense means nothing to me.
pic related.
>>
Isabella Sivingdudge - Tue, 10 May 2016 14:37:39 EST ID:baKi3kG2 No.205928 Ignore Report Quick Reply
is it cultural appropriation if I start selling HIFFWE shirts and it catches on in the mainstream and people who have never visited this site are wearing the shirts?
>>
Eliza Cennerstock - Wed, 11 May 2016 20:46:08 EST ID:oaKR9q1M No.205935 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205928
yes, but cultural appropriation isn't necessarily bad. People do it with Ramones tshirts in my neck of the woods. It's just fashionable for a while.
It's shitty because they have no respect for the band or punk or music at all. That shouldnt mean that I forbid it from mainstream use. If other people want to appear as retards to me, then fine, wear a ramones shirt, I will never give a damn about you.
It's not particularly good. for any reason...
>>
Samuel Goodlock - Thu, 12 May 2016 13:22:59 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205944 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205935
I guess you could say that's appropriation of punk culture by a non-punk, or rocker or whatever you want to call the people who listen to the Ramones. But I mean that's the thing about being free; it comes with some costs. If you want to freely exchange things like ideas and inventions, then you have to accept that sometimes things will be taken for granted by outside parties. Cultural appropriation (negative cultural sharing) and acculturation (positive cultural sharing) are two sides of the same coin, a coin that is required in order for culture to keep progressing and not stagnate in an ultra-conservative manner.

Besides, not only can you differentiate culture by geography, but also by time. Like, 80's punk and 2010's punk are two different punk cultures, for instance, with people in them that may not have been in both but only 1 of the two since they're both different but come from the same roots. But nobody ever mentions the time aspect of culture differentiation. Hell, most fucking people just over simplify the whole god damn subject and then just throw every single little culture together in a big bowl and call them the same thing. "Oh, black culture is inherent within all black people, whether they're Jamaican or American or African." Like, no it doesn't, all of those different geographical areas are going to have different cultures. People make such a big fucking deal about skin color these days when it's one of the most basic and unnecessary aspects of culture.
>>
Eliza Cennerstock - Thu, 12 May 2016 19:53:57 EST ID:oaKR9q1M No.205949 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205944
The thing is that words like appropriation and acculturation have specific meanings and uses. So it's actually wrong to say
>appropriation of punk culture
because we're only talking about one element: the Ramones t-shirt. Punk culture itself has not been appropriated, it still exists independently. Cultural appropriation also refers only to the appropriation of ELEMENTS ( I don't know how to do italics or i'd use them ). Acculturation is more like cultures gradually growing together or getting assimilated to one another.
Cultural appropriation is also sometimes used as a tactic, often subversively. So the Ramones logo was itself a reworking of the US presidential seal. The band wanted to be seen as an 'all-american' band. So a symbol of the United states, the establishment, political order etc. became a symbol for anti-establishment rockers....
appropriation has also been part of colonisation, so a way of destroying a colonised culture. Which is why people start shitstorms about it.


Gender a race identity by Isabella Brishdale - Fri, 01 Apr 2016 10:43:30 EST ID:fT4NxqpW No.205510 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1459521810057.jpg -(57646B / 56.29KB, 618x412) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 57646
Give me a logical argument on why it is socially acceptable to identify as another gender but not as another race.
22 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Hannah Hannergold - Fri, 22 Apr 2016 10:02:46 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205751 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205738
Wait until 2250 when moving your consciousness to a near-perfect mechanical body becomes the new norm and suddenly gender and race are a thing of the past, as is child birth.
>>
Hugh Dommerwere - Fri, 06 May 2016 11:42:17 EST ID:kPFtvti2 No.205890 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Still waiting for said logical argument.
>>
Wesley Fuckingshit - Fri, 06 May 2016 13:18:06 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.205891 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205890

Set aside your ideological box for a moment and look up the differences between transgender brains and non-transgender brains of the same physical sex. This thread reeks of agenda.

nb
>>
Emma Sebblechadge - Mon, 09 May 2016 00:50:22 EST ID:SdJ2BE4b No.205915 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205604
i think you mean the people holding the whip behind the SJWs
>>
Jenny Blumblefoot - Fri, 13 May 2016 04:39:48 EST ID:CcAJ01Mh No.205953 Ignore Report Quick Reply
because women control the men around them but men can't choose where they're born


Happiness by Doris Fabblewatch - Fri, 06 May 2016 15:09:32 EST ID:mTXiwGo4 No.205892 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1462561772636.jpg -(899851B / 878.76KB, 1024x1012) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 899851
So what I want to ask is this:
What are your thoughts about the happiness of wild animals, or any animals, including humans.

I say wild animals because thinking about it from that perspective got me to the not-fully-formed conclusion that only change affects overall happiness in living beings.

I mean, prosperity only leads to mere survival eventually, right?
2 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Martin Sisslenark - Fri, 06 May 2016 21:31:22 EST ID:NGWktGCi No.205895 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1462584682008.jpg -(107712B / 105.19KB, 690x388) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>205894
It's all about insight man. Any animal that can reason is capable of figuring out what they need to survive is actually stuff that brings them "pleasure". Thats why humans and other primates can reason that having a surplus of food is great, and also why we crave those things that can (although inadvertantly) bring us more resources. Although I define happiness as something totally different than pleasure.
>>
Hannah Drillertut - Sat, 07 May 2016 05:03:36 EST ID:jhKA/xCp No.205897 Ignore Report Quick Reply
When I stopped trying to be happy, I found something else. I don't define it, I don't give it a name, I don't examine it. I know who I am and what I am doing every moment of the day and I like it.

When I wanted to be happy, I understood what sad was, and I mostly felt sad. I think happiness is, like, one of those paradox ideas that we humans get stuck in and don't realize we're in a box or whatever. I'm not a philosopher, but I am sure it's true.
>>
Polly Crarringkid - Sat, 07 May 2016 16:28:22 EST ID:mTXiwGo4 No.205901 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205894
What? Happiness is specific? What word should I use?
I mean happiness in the sense that can very easily be applied to all beings.
Am I being naive?
>Few animals exhibit signs similar to outright human depression when in captivity if I remember my behavorial biology correctly.
I strongly disagree, and I'm not some new-age animal loving ununderstanding hippie. Grew up on a farm, didn't see much depression in the animals, but I learned to read their emotions and did not get the impression that they were limited in the way you imply.
>>205895
>Any animal that can reason is capable of figuring out what they need to survive is actually stuff that brings them "pleasure".
I'd say that association is instinctive. What you're thinking of is just a psychological exercise not really applicable here.
>>
Polly Crarringkid - Sat, 07 May 2016 16:36:08 EST ID:mTXiwGo4 No.205902 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205901
Not that I don't love animals.
I might love them to much, hence me questioning if I'm being naive.

Not Bearded
But Circumcised
Dat Penis
>>
Polly Crarringkid - Sat, 07 May 2016 16:38:24 EST ID:mTXiwGo4 No.205903 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1462653504085.jpg -(13970B / 13.64KB, 394x467) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>205902
Forgot to not be bearded
killing self ASAP


Thread about this guy by Phyllis Mazzlestere - Sun, 01 May 2016 21:01:47 EST ID:zJR5wuFK No.205841 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1462150907817.png -(57885B / 56.53KB, 220x220) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 57885
A bookstore sells books by Sam Harris in the philosophy section. Should I buy one and burn it on Liberation Day?

completely hypothetical
Let's have a good old internet-mediated chinwag about Sam Harris. and why he's so shitty.
11 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Archie Clankinfield - Wed, 04 May 2016 05:16:34 EST ID:49qmKpRL No.205860 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205858
> I 100% do not want to let people in from a culture that cheers when the Paris attacks happen. I 100% do not want to bring in immigrants or refugees who absolutely believe that Sharia law should replace secularism.
You should not be so afraid and actually meet some muslims because the vast majority do not chaer for terrorism. They are not bad people. Being a muslim does not make you bad. Being a bigot makes you bad, supporting Islamic State makes you bad, committing acts of terorism and other barbarism makes you bad. You should not otherise these people so much, for they will recognise much more in a peaceful man of a different religion than in a violent man of their own religion. You should understand also that Sharia is a rather similar concept to the American constitution and that muslims in the ME often call for sharia when they feel the government is no longer listening to them, much like american conservatives call for their own constitution. When muslims call for sharia in western countries, they are often surveilled, sometimes their groups are banned, individuals are arrested and deported, and rightly so, they try to rally young muslims to go to their death in 'holy' wars
>>
Simon Goodwill - Wed, 04 May 2016 12:18:50 EST ID:WLinKu+3 No.205869 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205860
I've seen it m8000. I was in Indonesia when Paris happened and people literally cheered. They seemed like overall nice people who can fuck right off.
>>
Archie Clankinfield - Wed, 04 May 2016 12:37:25 EST ID:49qmKpRL No.205870 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205869
i really doubt you are telling the truth.
>>
Polly Tillingstone - Wed, 04 May 2016 14:56:42 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205872 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1462388202584.gif -(191216B / 186.73KB, 499x499) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>205869
Is that you, Trump?
>>
Nathaniel Bresslefack - Thu, 05 May 2016 18:01:44 EST ID:1iJ/Y3fp No.205889 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205860
>Sharia is like the US constitution
>>205869
>Indonesians like literally cheered at terrorist attacks
I hate both of you so fucking much.


Mckenna by Betsy Baffingridge - Sun, 27 Dec 2015 06:41:19 EST ID:Ym9weT5z No.204565 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1451216479679.jpg -(11947B / 11.67KB, 236x354) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 11947
I am in my late 20s now nearly 30 and have had a wide experience with all kinds of substances from the age of around 14 aside from say heroin and DMT if we are going by the most notorious ones.

I have been really inspired by Terrence Mckenna's talks and ideas on life itself, on the whole link between DMT and consciousness etc. I am all too eager to try it myself but live pretty far away from that ability right now; that is besides the point however.

What are your opinions on the guys outlook on life, on DMT and on the mind / consciousness? He has been gone for a while now so time has been able to wash over his words.
26 posts and 3 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Eliza Puckledock - Sat, 23 Apr 2016 18:57:12 EST ID:sviFT3nS No.205781 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205770
Jesus christ, what a burnt out retard. He sounds like a kid who just made his first animal-to-human connection, like the first time a kid sees how some animal males compete for females in the wild so he starts to apply it by being an aggressive territorial asshole to others in front of women.
Well, you get the point, I think.
It takes literally 10 minutes of reading literature on this kind of stuff to realize how baseless a claim like "50/50 is too many" is; did he ever even read anything ever or did he just spout dumb shit off the top of his head? What is he even saying in any of this video?
>>
Jarvis Wangerspear - Sat, 23 Apr 2016 20:14:52 EST ID:gXJXBtKQ No.205783 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205781
>... off the top of his head
That's what I'm saying! He is reversing logical thinking. Instead of building an understanding on observations which he turns into an argument he just puts forward an argument and says "MUSHROOM TOLD ME CUNT". It is literally mind control.
>>
Jarvis Wangerspear - Sat, 23 Apr 2016 20:21:18 EST ID:gXJXBtKQ No.205784 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205783
Sorry i meant to take the "it is literally mind control" sentence off there because it appeared as baseless as mckennas shit. I based that sentence on a lot of work done by Jan Irvine, who has done a lot of research on McKenna. nb
>>
Doris Drammlehall - Wed, 04 May 2016 17:34:54 EST ID:/nyzBoLy No.205873 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1462397694415.png -(130841B / 127.77KB, 269x300) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
I would like more good psychedelic resources. Any form welcomed.

But personally, I'm searching for good audio lectures, audio podcasts, audio books relating to the psychedelic experience.
Terence McKenna is great, but I yearn for more.
>>
Caroline Blodgeway - Thu, 05 May 2016 05:09:06 EST ID:gXJXBtKQ No.205876 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205873
If a lack of critical thinking and pseudo science which supports eugenics is your thing you'd probably also like Zweites Buch (sequel to Meine Kampf)


Why don't people use the internet more often? by Frederick Dartville - Sat, 02 Apr 2016 12:22:39 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.205523 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1459614159506.png -(106406B / 103.91KB, 450x300) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 106406
It seems that everywhere I go, in meatspace or online, I hear people saying things that just aren't true. I understand why back in the day nonsense memes were so prevalent. Lack of education, no access to an enormous database of information that's one click away. But nowadays you can look up just about anything you want in five seconds. Have a theory about something? A few minutes on google will give you information for and against it and help you evaluate your worldview.

Now, lots of people lead very busy lives that aren't conducive to doing research on the internet. Fair enough. But the internet commentators clearly have at least some free time on their hands. The people posting outright nonsense on the internet are legion. I'm not just talking about things that have a lot of shades of gray or subjectivity, or things people have a vested ideological interest in. They post things that are just plain wrong from a scientific standpoint. It's very simple to discover that what they're posting is simply moronic.

-physical arousal in rape victims means they mentally desired what was happening
-If you ask someone you suspect might be an undercover cop if they're a cop, they have to tell you
-somatypes in the fitness community (ectomorph, mesomorph, endomorph)
-Netjester is a harmless website gimmick with no malevolent intentions

Why do people still adamantly insist on spouting untruths in the digital age when nearly all of the world's knowledge is at their fingertips? Why isn't it a more common practice to simply evaluate information/beliefs before you regurgitate them?
7 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Henry Poffingpetch - Sat, 16 Apr 2016 11:09:29 EST ID:fm1S8rNj No.205682 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205643
Scientists say the foreskin is just a useless flap of skin. Slicing and dicing your child's penis is okay!

http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2016/04/14/Study-Circumcision-does-not-reduce-penis-sensitivity/5981460663943/?spt=hs&or=hn
>>
Bombastus !RZEwn1AX62!!xXxJO70U - Sat, 16 Apr 2016 13:11:09 EST ID:gm9dPrV5 No.205684 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205682
Nice. It contradicts with what most studies confirm and even with the general anecdotal evidence of all people in the past 200 years over a vast variety of cultures confirm.
I can't wait to see this study stand up to peer-review scrutiny!
>>
Alice Suzzlewore - Wed, 27 Apr 2016 07:39:11 EST ID:K7HlIj+R No.205822 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205682

That study has since been refuted, as have the extrapolations the media made shortly after it was published.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-earp/does-circumcision-reduce-_b_9743242.html
>>
Ebenezer Guttingwill - Fri, 29 Apr 2016 03:26:06 EST ID:LYki2ic6 No.205833 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1461914766733.jpg -(44850B / 43.80KB, 479x502) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>205523
despite what circlejerk likes to think, the internet isn't very good at giving you the truth. there is a large upfront investement in finding those sources of 'good' information. For most people, who define 'good' information as that which confirms existing biases, they end up stuck browsing and endless rotation of the same shit over and over and over and wonder why the internet is both stimulating and horrifyingly boring at the same time.

oh wait here I am projecting. I think that is is way more difficult to glean useful information from the internet simply because you have to spend so much time understanding where it's coming from in order to trust it. At least in an academic journal you can read the bibliography.
>>
Rebecca Darryshaw - Wed, 04 May 2016 09:58:51 EST ID:5vNF2aHl No.205864 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205643
>>205682
>>205684
I asked my dad why he had me circumcised, since it's pointless and antiquated, and he told me it was just in case I ever wanted to become a Jew. nb because off-topic


The epistomological epistomology by Nicholas Ginderwater - Mon, 25 Apr 2016 05:20:41 EST ID:hvs4h/ox No.205805 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1461576041238.jpg -(80215B / 78.33KB, 650x461) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 80215
i want to come to you all with a plea. For six years i have been through an existential crisis. Revolving around a philosophical dissassociative break, where i simply knew the way i had things intellectually/spirtually/ let's just say foundationally put together was through a manner i don't want to disclose for personal reasons.

I trust this board through the years i have been on it, i've been hated and called names, and loved and gotten ideas. I'm no longer freaking out as i did when all of this phlisophical "learnin" began, but now adays i realize the reality is still slipping through my fingers.

I think i need to focus on epistomology. Or how we know what we know.

Not with a specific subject, but perhaps as a method to apply to many things.

The epistomological baromoter i had for the first twenty years of my life has been confounded so many times over the last seven years.

To many things have happened that contradict, the reality proposed by how things are and how i know things to be, that i can never find myself explaining any know how or how something would be.


I often just know things through a foggy dispostion, that leaves me feeling like an obsession with balance, threatened by any view, any imagination, or opinion at all.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
James Pettingforth - Mon, 25 Apr 2016 10:17:26 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205809 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205805
I'll give you some of the basics.
>how we know what we know
We don't know anything. You want to prove something? You have to view it in every different way possible, and you have to view it from start to finish, or possibly through infinite time. For instance, we think we know the laws of physics, yet what if 5 billion years from now an event alters the laws of physics on a universal scale? We'd have spent 5 billion years erroneously assuming the laws would never change just because they haven't before. Our lack of knowledge in regards to what will happen in the future is a big flaw in our logic. We just take a random amount of time and assume that if everything has remained the same that entire time then it will remain the same forever, which simply isn't true. Everything is subject to change, and humans have such a tiny understanding of the universe and metaphysics. What do you expect from us? We're just apes with wisdom and an aristocracy of information at our fingertips (the internet).

OP, maybe you should study elementary symbolic logic. It's essentially when you break ideas and statements into mathematic equations. It's very handy for understanding ideas. Also, since you seem so fascinated by the human hierarchy, I suggest you read The Gentleman by Confucius. Confucius had spent a lot of his life writing about the nature of humans and the natural hierarchies they form during life and how to navigate them.

Conflict will always happen. Justice for someone is evil for another, and vice versa. An act of good can lead to an evil outcome, just as an act of evil can lead to a good outcome. Life is just energy in motion, and obviously energies clash and collide.

I mean, if you really want more epistomology, you could also read Descartes and Kant. They're my two favorite 'what do we know?' philosophers.
>>
Archie Mishville - Tue, 26 Apr 2016 04:30:13 EST ID:hvs4h/ox No.205812 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205809
thank you very much

one of the things i've realized since yesterday is that when i showcase preference for one thing people think automatically but not unilaterally that i mean i want this instead of something else.

Sometimes the competition seems to be there for engagement, other times it seems dire with consequences.

And my understanding of other peoples emotional reality that they share and my link to it can be clouded.

Usually it's a problem of two or more things that i respect am close to or love that i can not insist or assert whether intellectually or to another person without difficulty that just because of x i don't hate y, much less get to express i love both x and y.

Where the lines are seem to be usually anticpated but not necessarily understood by me because it's at odds with my own actual feelings.

But because of the mutual feeling, emotions existing in social feedback, it can be a problem.

For all i know it's a hold over from unresolved feelings cropping back up from an unresolved issue in past. But there is a correspondonce to it's occurence and my intellectual coherence. When i'm not certain or when i cannot seek validity i cannot let it slide without these issues seemingly coming about. Where as in the past it was not the problem.


Is matriarchy a better way? by Ian Sucklesere - Fri, 22 Apr 2016 17:26:24 EST ID:i3QzAXqS No.205759 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1461360384746.jpg -(6776B / 6.62KB, 275x184) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 6776
Bonobos
>ruled by females
>peaceful
>all bisexual and thus more progressive.

While chimps are violent and ignorent. As both species are close to us genetically I think this supports my argument that women are better leaders than men.
3 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Bombastus !RZEwn1AX62!!xXxJO70U - Sun, 24 Apr 2016 14:37:38 EST ID:i6Id+/bH No.205803 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205788
Bonobos are a type of chimpanzee.

>>205795
Just let the thread die. He's clearly not open to discourse right now

However, in case he is, i'll this C&P post from the feminism containment thread:

[spoiler]
Bonobos
>ruled by females
>peaceful
>all bisexual and thus more progressive.
They don't have a notion of progressivism. They're fucking chimps (literally). However, I will grant that their peaceful society revolves around them releasing their built up rage on shit like rampant sex.

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
James Pettingforth - Mon, 25 Apr 2016 09:23:46 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205806 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205803
nb because this thread needs to die quickly,
but Bombastus, Bonobos are not Chimps. Bonobos are pygmy Chimps, an entirely different species than Chimp whom share a common ancestor. As I was saying, Chimps and Bonobos do not communicate because they're bisected by a major river. Chimps are a warrior species of ape and they often murder other Chimps, where as the Bonobos do no such thing, at least not nearly to the extent of Chimps.

Bonobos also face a sexual crisis other apes don't; they're over 66% female. Such a wide gap between sexes is pretty much unheard of in Primatology outside the Bonobos, as far as I can tell.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/07/3/l_073_03.html
>>
James Pettingforth - Mon, 25 Apr 2016 10:06:23 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205807 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yes, you see, the Zaire river has controlled primate immigration in the Chimp/Bonobo area. I guess 2.5 million years ago the river dried up and the larger primates bailed on the area as a whole whilst the Chimp predecessor remained in the area, and then the Zaire river started flowing again and their population was split in half, leading to the formation of the Northern Zaire Chimps and the Southern Zaire Bonobos. The Bonobos got it good, but that's because the apes they should be afraid of, the Chimps and Gorillas, are not able to reach them.

I mean, I guess from a social standpoint you could call Bonobos a little more progressive than Chimps since their culture is so peaceful, but at the same time you've got to understand that that's a stroke of good luck. Very rarely does nature allow for 'peaceful' animals to take it as easy as the Bonobos have been doing these past million years. But if the Zaire were to suddenly dry up, I have no doubt in my mind that the Chimps would probably forage south and end up commandeering the Bonobo's land, pushing Bonobos out of their home and toward extinction, so I could hardly call Bonobo's advanced seeing as they have such glaring flaws that nature has allowed them to overlook.

I love Primatology. Primates and humans are almost identical, psychologically, and I often find it fascinating the way in which most simple humans operate no different from an ape, hell they even look like apes, some of them.
>>
Betsy Braddlebere - Mon, 25 Apr 2016 21:17:34 EST ID:K7HlIj+R No.205811 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Bonobos are all pretty inbred I reckon.
>>
Shit Sabberpit - Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:43:27 EST ID:/3eoXSbg No.205814 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1461685407063.gif -(2097140B / 2.00MB, 286x186) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>205806
>>205803

Yep. Besides, comparisons between humans and other great apes aren't very reliable as chimps and bonobos represent contemporary relatives and not the 'natural' state or primitive examples of Man. They are just as evolved as we are, having followed a different evolutionary path than ours. Naturally they will evolve different behaviors that suits their particular environment.

Humans are warlike because that's the nature of the tribes/groups who survived to the modern age, and as such war and struggle is evidently a hard necessity for survival in the competitive human world.

nb shit thread


kant and you!! by The Fool !oj3475yHBQ - Thu, 21 Apr 2016 21:43:54 EST ID:G2LMnx/t No.205746 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1461289434921.jpg -(34114B / 33.31KB, 506x278) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 34114
Write what you think the main point of his Critique was, because I keep hearing him in reference to establishing the non-reality of things, that everything is subjective, and in general confirming deterministic materialism.

But what I'm finding in re-reading his work is that he actually seems to establish the soul as a real object, that we have no choice to accept that sensible objects are objective, and all around seems to confirm the majority of ancient mystical explanation of the universe.

Anyway, I've resolved to write a commentary on it, and it would help me greatly if y'all would input your opinion of his work here, with an explanation as to why you think the way you do...
>>
Hannah Hannergold - Fri, 22 Apr 2016 09:54:50 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205749 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205746
The Fool, are you familiar with the term Qualia or the philosophy behind it?

I honestly think that Qualia is a real trait and that humans have always known about it but deemed it different things, using words like 'soul' and whatnot to describe it. Before I studied philosophy I referred to Qualia as 'conscious experiencers' when I would try to talk about the way in which beings consciously experience the things around them with feelings.
>>
Bombastus !RZEwn1AX62!!xXxJO70U - Fri, 22 Apr 2016 18:36:40 EST ID:i6Id+/bH No.205762 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205746
I've never really read his Critique of Pure Reason and am slowly building up to it by reading the antitheses to Kant like Hume, Sartre, etc and fully understanding them before I even touch Kantian metaphysics.

Have you started from there, foolio? I personally think you'd get a lot out of Kant's Critique if you fully understand what he is really critiquing.
>>
Bombastus !RZEwn1AX62!!xXxJO70U - Fri, 22 Apr 2016 18:47:12 EST ID:i6Id+/bH No.205765 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205749
>54PBc
you are a good poster

nb for sucking Hannah's dick
>>
The Fool !oj3475yHBQ - Fri, 22 Apr 2016 19:45:24 EST ID:G2LMnx/t No.205766 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1461368724640.gif -(454266B / 443.62KB, 500x381) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>205749
I am familiar with the term but forget where it came from, my gut wants to say Descartes? speaking in relation to "the knower"?

Words like Qualia, Soul, Ego, are ultimately describing the same function, but their philosophical semantics are different.

Qualia, as I know it, is the concept of "the knower" but with an emphasis on awareness of sensory input. Ego, can either inspire the concepts of Id-Ego-Superego.. or the eastern interpretation of the illusory self. Soul is often associated with "spirit", possessing western connotations, and the implication of the self existing a priori to this reality.

I noticed from your last posts that you seem to have a particular liking for the term Qualia, is there a reason for this? I myself am picky about words and prefer Ego or Soul, though I think it is also a good I idea to use Qualia from the perspective of using a descriptor that doesn't have the psychological impact of religious connotations. I would use it for this reason, but I also think the aesthetic of a word is important... and I think Qualia sounds ugly... I think it might be because it has too many syllables to describe something that is paradoxically simple.


Sartre by Ernest Fuddleset - Sat, 02 Apr 2016 12:10:35 EST ID:LdHLS4vG No.205522 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1459613435630.jpg -(237110B / 231.55KB, 541x600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 237110
Hi all,
A bookstore near me has several works by Sartre, and I was wondering if any are worth picking up for the amateur/hobbyist philosopher. In particular, they have 'Critique of Dialectical Reasoning Vol 1' and 'Being and Nothingness'. Do you find his ideas useful? What are your critiques? I think it's important to add that I'm basically a Marxist who understands Sartre as trying to move past Marxism, and wonder if I could find some insights from him. French mid-twentieth century general thread maybe?
18 posts and 7 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Frederick Blussledack - Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:44:13 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205723 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205722
Osho is a lot of fun. He's a bit dogmatic, but he's also got many wise points. Like, his whole 'if you love a flower, don't pick it, let it be,' thing really helped me affirm my belief that true love is selfless where as selfishness, wanting to pick the flower, is not love but is really just instinctual greed.

What'd I move on to? Hmmmm. Well, I was never a student of philosophy, more of a philosopher, like a mathematician that never picked up a book on math. I was always sitting around thinking, never really paying attention to others' ideas or reading philosophy. But then when I was binging on Absurdism and Existentialism (I had no idea those were their names at the time) I had the bright idea to just type my ideas into Google, and then that's how I found Descartes and Camus. So I read a lot about them and their ideas to begin with, and I found that I agreed with them most of the time. Then I really didn't read anymore philosophy until freshman year of college when I suddenly became way into Buddhism. I read a lot of Koans at the time. Koans are good; they're very deep, very thought-provoking. I really just wanted to figure out how not to be miserable, but then I realized Buddhism, like any other popular school of thought, was full of bullshit. But then I started reading about Siddhartha and his philosophy, and that was pretty epic. The original Buddha really was quite a genius in philosophy, psychology and science (at the time). Then I took an Eastern Religion class one day and I ended up become a big fan of Confucius and the Taoists. Confucius understood humanity's innate need for social hierarchies and philosophized about it a lot, about how to take advantage of it, while the Taoists were writing about how good and evil are subjective. I really learned a lot from Confucius and Taoism. Then I got into the ancient greeks like Aristotle, Socrates, Pyrho, the Stoics and the Cynics. Today, I would say that even though I am my own philosopher, my philosophy very much lines up with Taoism and Cynicism, but that doesn't help much when trying to describe myself since nobody around here knows what a Taoist or a Cynic are, especially…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Frederick Blussledack - Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:50:03 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205724 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Philosophy has changed me, from an angry, hate-filled, miserable youth into a calm, relaxed, perpetually-happy young adult. That being said, I don't think it would have happened if not for that entire year I spent in bed internally bleeding. I lived in a world of hell where things like dreams and aspirations didn't exist, and I realized during this time that happiness is a way of life, not something you can obtain. It's about accepting everything that's wrong and then just trying to be happy anyway. I'll never forget this one time I had to clean out my colon with salt water, but my colon was covered in cuts, so the salt water burned like fuck. I couldn't do it at first, but then I got blazed and watched Steve Brule and I was just laying there trying to do this thing right shouting, 'FOR YOUR HEALTH!' and then I had a nice laugh even though I was experiencing hellish pain.
>>
Hamilton Smallcocke - Tue, 19 Apr 2016 21:25:48 EST ID:LdHLS4vG No.205729 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205723
First off I am heartened and impressed that you've found solace. I'm still having trouble but you are inspiring.

I was unconsciously thinking that as time went on philosophy would just get better and more complex but that's funny. I recently read Tao Te Ching myself. I am very conflicted about it. On the one hand it FEELS right but I feel like it's ultimately a reactionary system that normalizes feudal relations (I understand Confucius is also this way but I've never read). On the other hand, he is so right about keeping people living simply, because what has capitalist progress brought us but further degradation and misery? Sometimes it's very hard to believe that socialism is a possibility.

So far I like Osho, he is a little dogmatic maybe but he still tries to emphasize how Buddha's teachings weren't dogmatic or doctrinaire but rather emphasized consciousness as opposed to obedience. Osho is at least better than Theravada. But Osho maybe trends towards the "Buddhism" I like which is Zen. I have a lovely volume called "The Zen Teachings of Bodhidharma", and Osho sings his praises.
>>
Phoebe Gopperbodging - Wed, 20 Apr 2016 11:10:25 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205736 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205729
Haha eh I wouldn't call it solace, I'd use the word balanced, maybe even wisened. I like to think anyone who's miserable can get to a perpetual state of happiness, they just have to learn appreciation for what they do possess in this life, which sadly I think is a quality not innate in humans due to our primal urges, our primal need to constantly advance and accomplish and win, never being content with what we have. I'm content with what I have even though I'm actively trying to gain more, and I think because of it I can appreciate the things I've got and the things I'm going to get in a much richer, more fulfilling way than people who gain the things they want but then can't help but want more almost immediately. I think that whether I lose everything I have or gain innumerable riches, I'll be happy either way. But, at the same time, happiness requires mental stability, and that is something I'm sure I will lose if my brain becomes old and brittle, which is sad but inevitable, and I don't believe in fearing the inevitable. I undergo existential crisises once in a blue moon, but they never actually make me budge because I know that would only make things worse rather than better.

Yeah, Taoism does feel right, but I guess one thing to consider is that what feels right is how animals make decisions, where as humans have the gift of critical thinking, which can persuade us along toward other decisions we'd never feel are right. Like say for instance some meat you had smelled awesome but you knew it was well past it's expiration date; if you were an animal you'd just eat it, but due to critical thinking you can take factors into consideration that go beyond the scope of our senses, like microbial shit. I've never seen a germ, but I know what they can do and I fear them for it, where as I assume no other animal knows what a germ is. Luckily for them, their mouths and stomachs are way better at killing germs than ours.

I don't think capitalism has brought us misery. I think capitalism has brought us all a great deal of happiness, and I think that is a big part of why people are so miserable. Ever seen that episode of S…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Phoebe Gopperbodging - Wed, 20 Apr 2016 11:12:13 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.205737 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I mean, I guess I think that regular people love looking up to geniuses like Siddhartha, but these normal people sadly can never do what he did, intellectually, so they just emulate him in hopes of at least tasting what his life was about, found a whole religion and way of life in his honor in hopes to maybe even produce more of people like him. That's genetic diversity for you, none of us are the same.


Polytheism and Duotheism by Simon Dinnershaw - Wed, 16 Mar 2016 09:47:30 EST ID:Y/XbV/Gq No.205361 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1458136050252.jpg -(291929B / 285.09KB, 1200x927) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 291929
Why is believing in more than one god so bastardized and held less credible than monotheism or pantheism? Why is not thought as much as a possibility as one god is? One would think ANY theism is as credible as the other in such a supernaturalistic society! Yet this is not the case. Is it the books of yhe abrhamic religions that gives it more credibility? Why have do many people turned away from the idea of more than one god/godess? Is this simply due to an advancement in science? I think not. If this were the case doubting the existenxe of any number of gods would be way more common! My idea is that it has to do with the development of our psychology. Is it possible this is due to the loss of the hypothesized bicameral mind? I think so.
13 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Jack Niggergold - Thu, 24 Mar 2016 08:05:15 EST ID:SxS3NBjy No.205442 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205439
what i meant is that the writers use a specific methodology which might ignore certain information and contradict alot of what we regard as common knowledge. It is also doubtful that they will ever have conclusive proof. However one of the writers has answered many of the criticisms and maybe filled alot of those holes that can be poked in the thesis.
>>
Nathaniel Dankinforth - Wed, 13 Apr 2016 18:02:38 EST ID:oGmfq4CI No.205651 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1460584958641.png -(106564B / 104.07KB, 665x598) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>205361
To answer your first question, it's simply because in early western society polytheistic religions were very dour whereas christianity and islam offered hope for a better world: heaven. That's it. Aside from that your post is rife with fallacies, such as the statement that polytheism is "bastardised". This is onky true in western societies for aforementioned reasons. In eastern cultures the idea of polytheism is very much accepted by religious folk, Hinduism being the biggest of the eastern polytheistic religions. Nb for not knowing qhat you're talking about
>>
Bombastus !RZEwn1AX62!!xXxJO70U - Sat, 16 Apr 2016 02:30:11 EST ID:2BUykYck No.205680 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205361
>how does wind work?
>a god, duh
>how does sun work?
>a god, duh
>how does water work?
>a god, duh
*SCIENTIFIC ENLIGHTMENT
We learn about the great things like:
Convection currents, chemistry/nuclear physics, lunar tides and space, etc.

Oh. Well we don't need those Gods anymore. I guess we'll still keep Allah, Buddha, some Hindu Gods, representations of Ra, Kinich Ahau, Quetzalcoatl, etc because we still don't know how LIFE works.
Having multiple Gods in this modern day is a bit less "logical" than just having one creator. Mainly out of history but also because: what would multiple Gods accomplish now that science has killed magic?

I personally hope we never will figure out how life "works". It's more fun that way.
>>
Cedric Lightway - Sat, 16 Apr 2016 22:53:47 EST ID:yKPN7ShC No.205693 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I've heard there's a long tradition of logical and mathematical arguments proving the existence of god, like, one god.
>>
Albert Chagglehatch - Sun, 17 Apr 2016 10:46:32 EST ID:1iJ/Y3fp No.205703 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>205693
Sounds like some nonsense STEM autists would get up to.


<<Last Pages Next>>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.