People who have barely finished high school should not be allowed to discuss topic like sentience. In fact they shouldn't be allowed to discuss anything. Philosophy, like masturbation, is fine as long as you do it in private, but you may not do it in public unless you're at a rock concert.
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-31 8:15
Philosophy should be taught since primary school. If just to stop people from being annoying fucktards when they get older.
And I mean proper philosohpy, not christian philosophy or liberal philosophy. Teach them to be open and use logic etc..
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-31 8:23
There is, sadly, no such thing as 'proper philosophy'. It's all highly improper.
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-31 11:20
Ever since Christianity has been drilled into my brain, I have been fighting it.
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-31 14:58
So not even the philosophy of how not to become a crazy scientologist-koolaid-indoctrinated-cultist completely batshit fucking loco son of a bitch is improper?
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-31 16:06
>>1 is DQN. Life is about philosophy, there is no "wait until you're older." If you don't ponder life now, you probably won't that often anyway. But there are still thirteen year olds who can carry a decent conversation.
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-31 16:22
Life is about having fun while you're young, getting an education, finding someone who you want to spend the rest of your life with, having children and being successful at whatever you do, and then if you're lucky, dying with dignity before senility claims you.
Your life won't be enriched if you read Kierkegaard, are able to define qualia, or tell the difference between neutral monism and functionalism. Here's some advice from someone who figured things out too late: philosophy is bullshit. Essentially it all comes down to word-play. Spin a few words around and you can argue any point in a largely irrefutable manner.
This is, I realise, a waste of my time.
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-31 16:56
Spin a few words around and you can argue any point in a largely irrefutable manner.
o rly
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-31 20:48
>>7 Life is about having fun while you're young, getting an education, finding someone who you want to spend the rest of your life with, having children and being successful at whatever you do, and then if you're lucky, dying with dignity before senility claims you.
Too complex. Reduce it down to what fuels all of it. Complexity is the result of simple rules applied to lots of variables.
Life is about having fun, period. The reason why you want to study is so you can have a better job and earn more money, to have more fun (because you'd be poor otherwise, and that's not fun). You want a wife and kids because it's fun. You want to be successful because it's fun. And you want to dye with dignity because dying like a loser is not fun.
That's why everyone is having so much fun!!! (not)
haha
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-01 6:06
Kids are totally not fun.
I can understand people finding satisfaction in having raised children, but the process itself is a PITA. You'll be poorer too.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-01 19:29
>>5
Yes, because it turns you into a crazy loco batshit "normal" conformist member of society. When you're surrounded by like individuals, your craziness isn't as apparent. It's helpful to take a look at the results of your so-called civilization in order to get some clarity. IMHO, cults like Scientology are a SYMPTOM of society at large and not a separate problem unto itself.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-01 20:52
>>13
Sorry, but you don't understand. The philosophy of not being loco is about the understanding you have just teached. However, there is nothing wrong with conforming, this is irrelevant. We are all different, but we all believe murder should be illegal, conformity and insanity are not very congruent or logically related. Yes, people who tend to act exactly the same are members of cults, but conforming itself isn't the problem.
The problem comes in questionning, if someone refuses to question the existence of god because he thinks questionning go'd existnece will send him to hell or something, then you have yourself a cult. I fear you have adopted the liberal vs conservative bug.. Look at things logically, questionning things rather than stating you want things to change just for the sake of it or because you think it puts more pressure on evil coorporations or whatever. Because one day you might change something that shouldn't be changed, such as the right to the freedom of speech. Conservatives think the right to the freedom of speech is a good idea, should that be changed?
Don't be silly.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-01 22:08
All kids should be tested upon birth, the weak ones be killed.
Name:
dv2006-01-02 3:11
I suggest a test by throwing them overboard a few miles off the coast. If they make it back they get to grow up.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-02 21:49
What's with the ad hominem and intellectual high-horse?
4chan = big orgy rock concert
Besides, it sounds like philosophy offends you. Ha!... Scientists.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-02 21:59
Science without philosophy may be flawed, but philosophy without science is just inane.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-03 12:25
Science without philosophy is Science. It does not need or use philosophy, and if you're trying to fill what Science can't explain with philosophy, religion went that way.
Name:
Mr. Science2006-01-03 14:07 (sage)
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSCIENCE!
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-03 14:23
>>19
Except that, of course, religion does not complement science. It replaces it.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-03 15:41
if you're trying to fill what Science can't explain with philosophy
No, no, no. Science is based on philosophy. They don't statically complement eachother, they interact.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-03 15:55
When was the last time you saw a philosopher have a grasp of any part of modern science? Most of them don't even know what the thermodynamic laws are about.
No respectable scientist would call himself a philosopher today.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-03 18:06
I'm a philosopher and the thermodynamic laws are as follows. I will deifne them fro mthe top of my head as I haven't look up the definition on wikipedia, which you can test if you care by googling.
1: Energy never leaves an isolated system.
2: The total rate of transfer of energy in an isolated system decreases at an irregular rate over time. Or entropy decreases over time.
amirite?
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-03 20:46
>>22
Greek Age called, it wants this thought back.
Name:
Mr. Science2006-01-03 23:08
I'm not offended or afraid of philosophy. My mom was a philosopher and my dad a capitalist. My mom moved to England from Italy to escape religion in 1660, where she married my dad in 1680 and gave birth to me in 1750.
Yeah. girl boy ratio is 5:1 in uni and 3:1 in the whole of the city. But as you can tell, I'm still a virgin since I'm on 4chan lololol.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-09 15:17
>>32
4chan doesn't necessarily means you're a virgin. But by Jove it sure does add meaning to the expression "I get lucky", because I can't really describe getting laid as anything else than being FUCKING lucky.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-09 15:27
Lucky's an empty concept. This is the SCIENCE and MATH board. If you must use it at all, use some probability theory to back it up.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-09 15:55
Okay, you'd have to take the population of cambridge,
remove all the males,
remove all non students
remove all sober girls
remove all girls with boyfriends
remove all girls with girlfriends
remove all girls who don't want either
And you'd have our target population N.
Now out of that population, there are a few girls that would sleep with a 4channer. However the probability of finding one is generally considered to be equal to the probability of finding Richard Feynman's ghost in your closet with a handful of neutrinos.
Name:
Anonymous2006-01-09 16:06
What about the ones that a 4channer wouldn't sleep with? Oh, wait...