-  [WT]  [PS]  [Home] [Manage]

  1.   (new thread)
  2. [ No File]
  3. (for post and file deletion)
/phi/ - Philosophy
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 1000 KB.
  • Images greater than 200x200 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 804 unique user posts. View catalog

  • Blotter updated: 2018-08-24 Show/Hide Show All

We are in the process of fixing long-standing bugs with the thread reader. This will probably cause more bugs for a short period of time. Buckle up.

There's a new /777/ up, it's /Moldy Memes/ Check it out. Suggest new /777/s here.

Movies & TV 24/7 via Channel7: Web Player, .m3u file. Music via Radio7: Web Player, .m3u file.

WebM is now available sitewide! Please check this thread for more info.

Darwin and his mental retardation Anonymous 18/02/22(Thu)09:43 No. 13431 ID: 44a1c4 [Reply] [First 100 posts] [Last 50 posts]

File 151928899017.jpg - (97.22KB , 479x327 , ch2f1.jpg )

>A conclusion that two (or more) genes or proteins are homologous is a conjecture, not an experimental fact. We would be able to know for a fact that genes are homologous only if we could directly explore their common ancestor and all intermediate forms. Since there is no fossil record of these extinct forms, a decision on homology between genes has to be made on the basis of the similarity between them, the only observable variable that can be expressed numerically and correlated with probability.

>Taung Child's skull not human-like

How can anyone seriously believe in "evolution" when it all is based on a incomplete fossil record, that proves nothing, and comparative genetics that's just conjectures.

Fedora tippers are grasping at straws.

211 posts and 53 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 19/03/12(Tue)13:12 No. 13930 ID: 32ca83

Fedora tippers only believe what they can extrapolate. They don't need real evidence.

Anonymous 19/03/14(Thu)13:57 No. 13933 ID: ec9b1c

That is how they operate. If they can't show you how species appear then they assume it happens. It's pure conjecture.

Anonymous 19/03/19(Tue)14:00 No. 13937 ID: 518c7f

It's a convincing lie but a lie nonetheless.

Anonymous 16/12/24(Sat)23:39 No. 12763 ID: 0f36a6 [Reply] [First 100 posts] [Last 50 posts]

File 148261917389.jpg - (39.24KB , 446x413 , Tinfoil euphoria.jpg )


Why are atheists so obsessed with aliens and other conspiracy theories? There is literally no credible evidence for their existence. Is it because they are immature manchildren?


201 posts and 80 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 19/03/09(Sat)09:34 No. 13924 ID: d60c6c

File 155212049318.jpg - (56.91KB , 800x447 , elvis in space.jpg )

How can you doubt that Elvis was abducted by extraterrestrials? You need to open your eyes, man. He's living on Venus right now.

Anonymous 19/03/17(Sun)06:31 No. 13935 ID: 78b64a


Anonymous 19/03/20(Wed)16:44 No. 13939 ID: 57f992

He's on Venus?! I thought he was on Mars. Oh boy, do I feel stupid!

Plato's Democracy to Tyranny Anonymous 18/04/19(Thu)19:20 No. 13503 ID: 8bdadd [Reply]

File 152415843966.jpg - (273.31KB , 1258x1600 , plato.jpg )

In the United States and other western democracies (see it's in the phrase). We are currently in a degenerate cosmopolitan democracy that values wealth, possessions, and sex over virtue and intellectual pursuits. From here individuals are atomized. They begin to hate their situation and they demand the rule of a tyrant. This explains the phenomena of Trump, the support for Bernie Sanders, and even some of the youths support for Jeremy Corbyn in the UK.

As an American, I was surprised by the vociferous response of virtually any progressive millennial to brexit. I couldn't understand why they cared. Until it dawned on me, we have become so cosmopolitan that people want an all powerful supranational entity to rule over their quasi-bohemian lifestyle.

7 posts and 1 image omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 18/05/19(Sat)18:25 No. 13531 ID: 1e4c65

>implying they don't follow what the media says unconditionally today

Anonymous 18/12/24(Mon)06:56 No. 13831 ID: 7270ce

The best part of a democracy is everyone gets a vote.

The worst part of a democracy is everyone gets a vote.

Anonymous 19/02/18(Mon)11:08 No. 13886 ID: 13ccd2

Technically the "middle class" is supposed to have wealth equivalent to royalty while not actually being royalty.

What would death "feel" like? Anonymous 19/01/21(Mon)06:59 No. 13867 ID: 94a09a [Reply]

File 154805034541.jpg - (51.11KB , 1280x720 , maxresdefault.jpg )

I found this video, loved it, and I thought to post it here. Discuss?

Death Anonymous 18/12/26(Wed)00:48 No. 13833 ID: fa01f9 [Reply]

File 154578171193.jpg - (51.56KB , 760x720 , 1288402649130.jpg )

Why do we generally feel sorrow and sadness when someone dies?

>he/she had so much to live for
>whole life ahead of her/him
ect ect

When dead, you won't think or feel anything. You don't exist anymore.

So, in reality we're feeling bad for ourselfs, no?

Anonymous 18/12/27(Thu)14:12 No. 13834 ID: d4b8d9

Um, duh? We mourn our loss.

Sounds like you mean to ask more specifically why we feel extra bad when somone commits suicide or dies young; which is because we feel they didn't get their allotted time (or rather, share a subjectively sufficient amount of their time and ours because humans are that petty and selfish)--as if there were any such thing as time and as if anyone has any entitlement to exist.

Anonymous 19/01/01(Tue)16:45 No. 13845 ID: 822d20

Yeah, funeral rites and traditions give the people who knew the person who died a little closure and to comfort one another for our shared loss.

Ultimately when a parent grieves for a child there really is no consoling them because it's the opposite of what's supposed to happen. The young are supposed to grieve for the old, not the other way around.

White Guilt isn't why Whites are distressed. Being extorted is. Anonymous 18/11/16(Fri)14:39 No. 13715 ID: d74134 [Reply]

File 154237559892.jpg - (6.93KB , 268x188 , aynRandTeaching.jpg )

"[I feel] the same as everybody else, only more consciously."
-Ayn Rand, Tom Snyder interview, 1979

The distress associated with Whites' acquiescence to extortion (Whites paying nonWhites to prevent them destroying) is
mistaken for White guilt, when the distress is actually proximity to minorities who coerce Whites.

While the emotion (distress) is the same, remedying this distress requires treating its actual source-- which is not White guilt, but rather proximity to nonWhites who coerce Whites.

Recognizing that White guilt cannot exist because guilt requires us (not have wronged another) does not free us from distress.
But recognizing the interplay (coercion and extortion) between Whites and nonWhites in close proximity does show us a rational cause of our distress, and the method by which to decrease it: more distance between Whites and nonWhites.

24 posts and 7 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
LOLIHAET!PIZZA3TepE!!AvZQpjAGLj 18/12/10(Mon)22:19 No. 13803 ID: 5ac05a


Rand: "People need to be self-reliant, doing things in their own interests, even if it pushes some people down."
*Libertarians take her ideas, modify them to suit their needs, and use her popularity to and help popularize libertarianism*
Rand: "NO NOT LIKE THAT!!!!!!1!!!!"

How the fuck can anyone take such a femcuck so seriously?

Anonymous 18/12/12(Wed)04:20 No. 13808 ID: b21d9d

A dead philosopher isn't around to refute whatever interpretation of their philosophy you come up with.

No one takes her seriously; they take themselves seriously and wrap their own ideology in the tattered remains of hers.

Anonymous 18/12/22(Sat)15:15 No. 13829 ID: f100db

File 154548813016.jpg - (24.07KB , 240x298 , ayn-rand.jpg )

The nice thing about Ayn Rand is she's so recent and relatively popular in a "goddamn this author is batshit insane" kind of way that there's lots of interviews with her where she flat-out states which groups are doing what based on her writings and how they're completely misinterpreting what she wrote. Since most of those groups, like American Libertarians, have continued forward to today with very little in the way of changes, we can easily take what she said then about them then and continue to apply it to them.

Then there's what she actually did while she was alive, which had virtually nothing to do with what she wrote about. Since, unlike the people she so often railed about, she wasn't actually stupid enough to take what she wrote seriously. Pic related.

Anonymous 18/09/01(Sat)07:40 No. 13603 ID: 8c87d4 [Reply]

File 153578043969.jpg - (77.53KB , 479x418 , PhotoText.jpg )

Natural is defined by Oxford dictionary as "Existing in or derived from nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Process is defined as "A series of actions or steps taken in order to achieve a particular end."

The words together mean a process that was produced without a conscious agent.

Now here is the evidence that this belief is subjective and therefore doesn't exist.

A conscious agent is a being who is aware of it's surroundings and has the ability to act upon it.

Birds, beavers, humans are examples of Conscious Agents. We know they are because they build things such nests, dams, and jet engines. Showing they are indeed Conscious of the surrounding materials and they have the ability to act on them.

Conscious agents can produce processes that are said to be products of natural process, but natural process cannot produce processes created by conscious agents such as birds nests, beaver dams, and jet engines.

All of the material that Conscious agents have access to is the same material that natural process has access too.
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

Anonymous 18/12/08(Sat)03:27 No. 13796 ID: 3744da

The definition of Natural by the Oxford dictionary presented in the OP appears to me to be calling humankind an alien species in terms of it's relationship to the entity "nature".

Provided meaning of "Natural Process" implies conscious intention.

Is consciousness alien technology?
Would every type of consciousness be a different alien species?

Anonymous 18/05/19(Sat)17:45 No. 13530 ID: 1c68b3 [Reply]

File 152674471722.png - (740.23KB , 3460x1912 , Solar_time_vs_standard_time.png )

Time is a fantasy; there is no such thing.

8 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Anonymous 18/12/05(Wed)15:21 No. 13786 ID: 4b92a2

5 niggers from now OP will be hit by a truck

Anonymous 18/12/05(Wed)15:49 No. 13788 ID: 8a0547

File 154402134923.jpg - (58.68KB , 500x603 , 90 Sweet Neck, Dude.jpg )

That's two and half double-niggers, but how long is a nigger?

Anonymous 18/12/05(Wed)19:38 No. 13790 ID: e9a682

File 154403510699.jpg - (8.59KB , 200x201 , downloadfile-64.jpg )

1.5x as long as a white man.

Time Theory Anonymous 18/11/28(Wed)05:44 No. 13768 ID: 7c84ca [Reply]

File 154338026787.jpg - (258.48KB , 1168x1774 , edie-sedgwick-andy-warhol-chuck-wein.jpg )

What is the theory that time is a human construct and the way our brains process reality. Everything is simultaneously happening. Possibly related to the feeling of mushrooms where every moment is like a still image instead of a flowing video, as well as life being like a video of multiple still images? Where can I read more on a related philosophy

nihilism/absurdism tomska 18/10/16(Tue)14:11 No. 13671 ID: 231a2f [Reply]

Hey guys im setting up this thread to discuss the differences and similarities between two popular athiest philosophies, nihilism and absurdism. Now if you are christian and want to come to this server to insult us athiest and try to force your religion on us, PLZ DONT!!!
I am not trying to insult your religion, just discuss an interesting topic with my fellow athiests. All other post will be taken down with a week of posting.

Anonymous 18/11/21(Wed)20:00 No. 13744 ID: 24af14

You have two versions of the same thread. I think this is the more recent one.

Anyway, nihilism and absurdism both recognize that meaning is an abstract mental concept and therefore nothing has meaning in the absence of an interpreter. Real is what exists even after you stop believing in it, so meaning isn’t traditionally real.

Both conflate purpose, meaning, and value. They say that if there is no inherent value and there is no inherent purpose, you’re free to do whatever. The subjective values and reasons you hold onto can be important, even if they aren’t objectively real, or you can live as though nothing is important to you.

Nihilism isn’t a complete life philosophy so much as it is a philosophical observation, the observation that the universe is inherently meaningless. Absurdism can mean simply noticing that things are absurd, like the term ‘absurdist comedy’, but (if I remember correctly) I think Absurdism was also the name for Camus’ personal philosophy. If you want to know more about Camus’ personal philosophy, I suggest you read his books. If you want an easier read, you can read The Stranger, a short novel possibly illustrating how Camus feels about the absurdity of existence.

One thing I think was weird about Nietzsche was how he spoke as though someone who does what I said earlier and “holds onto their subjective values and reasons” is no longer a nihilist. That’s kind of semantical of me, though. Nietzsche thought that people who refused to hold subjective values, and reasons for existence, were essentially pathetic cowards. Nietzsche believed in cultivating the ego and scultping the personality to harness the divine, creative energy which flows through all “great men” and helped them forge modern society.

Delete post []
Report post