Philosophy General

>What would you define evil as?

Pain, suffering, etc.

A world in which none suffer is a good world.

So a world with beings incapable of suffering would naturally all be good beings?

>why do you disguise what a brainlet you are by droning on about nothing in every thread you come into
Because that's what philosophy is and that's what philosophers do.

Attached: 1526389784434.gif (500x290, 491K)

Honestly, after 2 years of deep philosophical thinking (read hundreds of books), I've come to realize that the more I learn, the more problems emerge and the more confused I become.

Not that user, but in a world where it's impossible to inflict suffering, and an evil person would be defined as someone who does, they would all be naturally not evil. If goodness is defined as alleviating the suffering of others, they would all be naturally not good. If goodness is defined as making someone else's life better, or enhancing their existential state in some way, they would not all naturally be good.

>he actually thought he'd find answers in philosophy
What a brainlet

Attached: 1538905086506.jpg (536x593, 156K)

Yeah I guess that's the point of philosophy you retard.

Why do you assume "good" exists?

Realizing that you know nothing can be very liberating or profound, like you've just spent 20 years examining grains of sand for the piece of wisdom that will make the years of searching worth it and you just realized you're sitting on a beach. That's probably tacky sounding but if you realize that NOBODY knows anything it can be very liberating too and it makes simple wisdom and genuine curiosity that much more appealing. Honestly this kind of thinking helped me start to get out of the neet years after high school.

So good is nonexistent that is your definition? It's a fantasy bookmark that societies fabricated to keep people above the water line?

all wrong, you are simply brainlet failed normies

>Yeah I guess that's the point of philosophy
What? Finding answers? You got up on the wrong foot there m8.

Attached: 1538808369469.jpg (400x270, 32K)

I'd say philosophy is more about systemically destroying answers.

t. 100 IQ brainlet who projects feelings of intellectual inferiority on to others

I don't see any reason to think otherwise.
It's a human word, a literal meme, nothing more.
Or can you prove otherwise?

Not when you're depressed all the fucking time. My depression created an existential crisis. Seeking answers is the only way to cope.

I cannot. Maybe in the pursuit of trying to define the meaning of "value", "goodness", "rightness" people might better understand what things they consider good themselves and in their own lives. Just a little bit of axiology my man.

I'm sorry about that man, that is really noble and I hope you don't think I'm being cheesy. You should be proud you even care about things like this.

Don't you suppose that a non-human animal could have a conception of good?

>it's impossible to lie about an uncertain future

I'm not so sure about that.

Its hard to be when normies dont value anything I come up with in terms of philosophical insights.

I think they would at least have a definition of better. Otherwise they'd just lay on their side in a tar pit while buzzards pecked at them.

"Who cares?" is the real answer.

Not many people will, most modern philosophers think the entire conversation boils down to three questions and people have been trying to answer them for thousands of years. They probably won't put much stock in anything a single person came up with in a short life time.

Good is a quality which means that something is behaving in correspondence with its nature/purpose. The closer it is to a conceptual ideal, the more it is considered "good."

Very Aristotle, I like it. Do you like his works on morals?

More like stoic, don't you think?

Attached: 1539105182172.jpg (867x685, 96K)

Yes, the golden mean and Justice as the sum of all virtue are fairly profound ideas; I love Organon most of all though, I'm convinced it increased my IQ by at least 10

I beg to differ. I think what I will offer will aggregate with what other philosophers offered in the mind of the next generation philosopher. Plus, I have presented a very interesting metaphysical theory that changes a lot of perspectives.

A lot of his ideas hold up to a LOT of fucking scrutiny and that's really all you can ask of any philosopher.

I don't get it

Attached: 1454561606941.jpg (472x620, 59K)

Metaphysics are what interest me the most I'd love to hear some of your thoughts.

Here's my discord:
Orator#9675
I hate discord but it'll have to do.

Yes sir. You can also view that "ideal" as what Plato refers to as a form

A conception of "better" implies a conception of "good". "Better" just means "more good".

The fact that it's "better" and not "gooder" is just due to how English evolved.

What do you think is the difference between the golden mean and the argument to moderation fallacy?

Good doesn't "exist." It's a concept. You might as well say "sexy" or "critical" doesn't exist. Equally pointless statements

Are you saying concepts don't exist?

I think the argument to moderation applies when you posit that the truth must lie in-between two conflicting ideas that AREN'T regarding temperament/character. Even with character it only works if you can correctly identify the proper extremes

I think you're missing my point. That post was also meant to be a bit humorous.

That would be correct my friend. Concepts do not exist

How would you define existence/reality then?

do you think that dogs know that they're dogs?

Anything that can directly affect other things that we know to exist (e.g. matter, energy, force)

>seeing all these brainlets spew shit on philosophy
If I were on my PC right now I'd BTFO all of you faggots

Attached: 1760a-petrus-camper-facial-angle-eugenics-paul-d-stewart.jpg (700x500, 90K)

Why do you have to be on your PC?

As we would define it no probably not, I'm sure they have some level of self identification though. They can recognize other dogs and female dogs as their mating partners but whether that is actual self awareness or just a chemical reaction playing out is impossible for me to say.

So things which can be measured/manipulated/observed?

Hope you can log on later and contribute something beyond shitting on the people in the thread.

>tfw you add user but they never add back

Attached: 1466042055111.png (400x295, 220K)

Bunch of brainlets. The only philosophy you MUST care about is philosophy of GOD.
Convert and Repent!

Attached: 1539139674985.jpg (512x368, 19K)

I'm not well versed in epistemology, but it would depend on your definition of "know." I would say yes, they are aware that they are different from other animals. They can't do much with that information though
That's an odd way to put it. I think I said it a little better. So:
>Measured - Yes, because it can affect something you can measure that change; although we may currently lack the means to do so
>Observed - Directly? not necessarily, you can't observe infrared light or ultraviolet light. Indirectly, yes. Measurement is a form of observation
>Manipulated - If it can manipulate other things then I would argue that yes it has to be susceptible to manipulation itself

Philosophy is the work of the Holy Spirit; given to you through the grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Humble yourself before the works of God

>actual self awareness or just a chemical reaction playing out

Hmm.

There's no way nor there is anything to know but the acute experience of God's grace entering your soul. Everything else is meaningless. Seek God and God only. Amen

>Hope you can log on later and contribute something beyond shitting on the people in the thread.
I'm here now you faggot. So, what do you want to know?

Attached: 1539079832121.jpg (2558x1384, 181K)

Squandering God's blessings. Tsk tsk

You're retarded so I won't learn anything from you other than how to educate folks with learning disabilities. Move along

You didn't pose anything as of yet, brainlet.

Attached: 1539015594767.jpg (412x350, 49K)

You came in and said we were all brainlets numbskull. So have at it

Well, you are.
Pepperoni

Attached: 1539209496120.png (476x635, 292K)

>I have to take critical thinking to finish my degree; ask for permission from the department to skip; they won't give me my degree w/o it; I tell them I have autism that prevents me from understanding the contents of this class; no response

Attached: 1533249544245.jpg (480x468, 20K)

what do you do ritalinbot as in career

I know you're probably being ironic but man do I hate you with an actual passion.

Only the last two are me. Why do you hate me? I was arguing with the first post you linked

What are the implications of God's omnipotence?

>what do you do ritalinbot as in career
Prostitute

Good and evil are constructs.
Good has no real definition since we created the entire concept.

Is there objective morality?

If there was life after death, would it be forever? If so, would you eventually go insane for being around forever and getting tired of everything going on in the afterlife?

I have a lamp with an on/off switch.
I wait 1 second and turn it on.
Then I wait /2 second and turn it off
Then I wait 1/4 second and turn it on again
Then turn it off after 1/8 of a second

After 2 seconds, I'm done. (1+1/2+1/4+1/8+...=2)

What is the final state of the lamp?

Is it on or off?

Impossible. Time is not infinitely divisible.

Angels have no concept of time. One of the fundamental differences between Heaven and this life is that when we are there, we could do nothing and still be happy.

The good is that which tends to existence. Generally a good thing for life is that which preserves the species. God is most good because he is the source of existence. Therefore evil, though limiting human existence, still exists, and is therefore good to God, because existence is good.