Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Schools of Philosophy
#1
So, what schools of philosophy, if any, do you guys subscribe to?

I find that I waver between existential nihilism and absurdism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absurdism

I find the wikipedia page on nihilism to be disappointingly sub-satisfactory, but, essentially, existential nihilism is the belief that there's no inherent meaning in life, and that the search for meaning isn't meaningful either.
Reply
#2
Hm. That is interesting. I appear to have independently created absurdisdm...I recently spoke with a theist who asked me, "Why do you live, why do you value life?" To which I responded to the effect of, "Why would I stop living? Why shouldn't I value life? Natural selection hammered both precepts fairly heavily into my head and I've seen no reason to remove them. Does believing in a deeper purpose to life than that change your behavior on a daily basis? Does life need a purfpose to be enjoyed properly? I have not found that to be the case."

Of course, that particular stance means I don't look to deeply into the purposes people profess to find, including ye alt philosophers, so I don't know where I agree with them.

Afterall, metaphysists don't have laboratories, and philosophy's just sans rigor, sense, and ptracticality. (Two very googleable quotes, in case you didn't catch the references.)
I came up with a very clever signature, as a matter of fact it's cleveritude was so clever that merely listening it would cause you to ascend to godhood. But then I forgot it, so instead you can listen to my gibbering inanities. I'm sorry.
Reply
#3
Oh, well, I can't say I've found any meaning, but that doesn't mean that I'll give up looking for one. I wouldn't say the search for meaning is meaningful, but I do find it to be important to me.
I don't know; I personally find philosophy to be very interesting, though I generally prefer to first figure out what my thoughts on a subject are before seeing if they line up with any pre-established schools.

To answer the questions of le theist:
Everybody's Coherent Extrapolated Volition (https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Coherent...d_Volition) involves existing/having consciousness, because, without existence, how can there even be a you to want or not want things? He wants to exist, I want to exist, you want to exist. As a non-theist, I believe that when one dies, they no longer have consciousness. Thus, in order to get what I want, which is to have consciousness, I live. Duh.

Why do I value life? Well, there aren't really any objective values without a god of some sort, but what is a value? It's something that matters to someone. Things that matter are things that have weight in someone's thought processes, and life has weight in my thought processes because life is.......... what I am? It completely encompasses my thought processes? I mean, when you're an atheist, life=existence, so..................

Those sorts of questions just don't seem very well thought out to me; here are some better ones. What is thinking? Why do I want the things that I want? Who am I? What the heck is going on? How do you defend yourself against fresh fruit?

Also, all hail the supreme xkcd. (hail! hail!)
Reply
#4
I've always had an inclination towards Stoicism
"It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society."
Reply
#5
Stoicism, huh? Why so?
Reply
#6
I do not think that life has a set purpose. If it does, then I do not know it, and it would be unwise for me to assume that it does.

The only entity that could dictate the set purpose of life would be: an Intelligent Designer, or Natural Laws. I consider both to be out of the question.

Intelligent Design
Assuming the existence of an Intelligent Designer, their decrees would still be taking an argument from authority. To solely follow their decrees would not be purpose, but automation. An axe does not have a life purpose, even if it chops wood. There is nothing inherently purposeful about the axe, it is merely a tool. The point that I’m trying to get at I guess is that an intelligent Designer would view or at least use us as tools. Tools do not have purpose, but extend the purpose of the forces behind them.

I consider this the weaker argument against a set purpose in life, but I also consider the existence of an Intelligent Designer to be a very weak claim, and so I’m not particularly concerned with strengthening it.

Natural Laws
Natural laws are pre-existent and universal. Moreover, they are impossible to break. I can’t just decide to ignore gravity or quantum tunneling for a day. This absoluteness of natural laws forestalls a purpose being inherent in the system. Or in other words, if there is a purpose to life, we would already be living it. natural laws do not allow choice in whether or not they are followed.

I cannot see any other sources of a predetermined purpose from an outside force with my admittedly weak vision. Thus I view no purpose other than that which we attribute to it.

So what purpose have I attributed to my life?

I can see two things that are worth doing: building something that is truly eternal, or doing something that I enjoy.

The first is enjoyment. What need is there for a higher purpose if I am happy?. I think giving in to enjoyment is weak. I do not discount weak people, but I could never live with myself if I was one of them. I of course ‘sharpen the saw’ and am by no means purpose, but I find an existence of solely filling desires to be purposeless. ‘Find a job you like, and you’ll never work a day in your life’ goes the saying, but what if the work is what makes the enjoyment worthwhile?

That leaves working towards an eternal goal. Very little is truly eternal. The longest living that we have found as a species thus far is the scientific method itself. Other than that, obsolescence will eventually come into play (I am, of course, not discounting the possibility of a better method, but current appearances would make this appear to be fact for now). However, if I can create a spark that burn brighter, does it matter if my individual contribution is immortal? I think not. If the first hominid that harnessed fire is lost to time, their contribution is not. Even if fire itself ceases to be used and progress beyond such crude methods, their contribution is still vital. Because without it we would still be savages in the truest sense of the word.

So that is my philosophy. I strive always to deny myself of my base urges (albeit often in vain), and to build a block that the tower of our future will rest on. I think our future will be bright.

However, the second part of my philosophy is that I am probably wrong. Something so weighty as life’s purpose must be perused at length. Also, if I cease to be consious, then I will be unable to ponder or to succeed in my purpose. Thus, in the words of Corwin Prater (I don’t know him either, but I love the quote), “immortality first. Everything else can wait.”

Sedulo,
I’ll walk myself out
Even if the stars should die in heaven,
Our sins can never be undone.
No single death will be forgiven
When fades at last the last lit sun.
Then in the cold and silent black
As light and matter end,
We'll have ourselves a last look back
And toast an absent friend.

--Elizier Yudkowsky
Reply
#7
*coughTaocough* A good translation is many things....

I know this is usually dismissed as "too much a religion to be a philosophy and too much a philosophy to be a religion," but it is a basic supposition that humans exist as we do (with all the history and awareness incumbent) because we are a part of nature, and that nature tends to favor balance, so if we live in balance (aka harmony) with our inner selves, our surroundings, and the other people in our lives we will find an effortless tranquility (not unlike the goal of Apropos' stoicism, but without the effort of premeditation) with being simple and simply being.

TL;DR: we are an accidental animal making the best of things
"Well if I were You-Know-Who, I'd want you to feel cut off from everyone else. Because if it's just you alone you're not as much of a threat." -Luna Lovegood
Reply
#8
I wouldn't want to commit, but I'm interested in Eliminative Materialism at the moment.
Reply
#9
As a medical professional you have to figure out how to sensibly thoroughly consider moral issues. What's more reasoning is to a great degree accommodating in think about you how to be watchful with implications of words and how to associate spots through those implications. Reasoning is tied in with utilizing the left half of your brain to figure out how to think methodically, and associating that with your instinct. A-One Assignments
Reply
#10
I don't use any philosophy and I live how I want. But my friend read a tone of books about Schools of Philosophy include Eliminative Materialism, existential nihilism, and absurdism. Also, he wrote a couple of article about it and if you want to read it and say your opinion, just visit essay-company.com
Looking at the best college paper writing service at essay-company.com is exactly what you need because our reviews will help you to find a cheap and reliable writing service that will not let you down!
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)