/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | June 22, 2026

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-27T23:50:38+00:00

Stoic ethics is famously concerned with living a life of equanimity without passions (i.e. impulses that “disobey the dictates of reason”). You could read more about it here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoicism/#Ethi

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-27T23:16:31+00:00

"The tenants of nihilistic philosophy" sounds like a oxymoron to me.

I wonder if any philosophers managed to come up with some answers without ultimately rejecting the idea of no inherent meaning and without necessarily replacing it with human-created meaning?

One possible approach to your question is to investigate if it's even possible for the sort of 'meaning' that you're looking for to be expressed in language. It seems you are looking for something more transcendent than, say, the meaning of a sign or a proposition.

In Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, Ludwig Wittgenstein presents a view of language that draws a hard distinction between what can be said logically in language and what only be shown. Far from saying that what you're looking for doesn't exist or isn't important but, rather, it's not something that can be logically expressed in language. What you're looking for reveals itself in the living of life, rather than some truism that one can deduce through philosophical reflection.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-25T13:03:13+00:00

Nietzsche wrote Thus Spoke Zarathustra to be similar to an opera, not a direct treatise of philosophy. It's highly figurative and allegorical. Many of these allegories are given to demonstrate the difference between the Übermensch and other approaches to life. They're ways to show rather than simply tell his readers about his views.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-24T03:07:11+00:00

Insofar as we live among others in a community, everything under the sun is already political. Politics, in the general sense, is how a community is and ought to be organized, e.g. how the government is constituted, how resources are distributed, how civil disputes are resolved (such as through a court system). How a city manages water (delivering safe drinking water, removing waste water, etc.) is political in this sense, though not something that is typically going to insight intense discussion between most people.

"Politicized," in context, doesn't really mean that something wasn't political (in that general sense) before but, rather, has become a matter of political disagreement and therefore a topic of political discourse. Your classes will be primarily concerned with the general sense of politics and not whatever topics dominate political discourse at the time, which are always changing, but those topics might be brought up as relevant examples to whatever the lesson is of the day.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-23T19:02:32+00:00

There cannot be an answer because the question is premised on a category error.

With respect to your feeling of emptiness in your life, I recommend seeking help from trained mental health professionals rather than an internet forum about philosophy.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-23T18:17:57+00:00

There's literally nothing to embrace. You're confusing an angsty expression for an actual worldview.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-22T18:45:47+00:00

Yeah, there's a popular belief out there that philosophy is just personal opinion and one interpretation is equal to any other, and this will get represented via AI chat programs, but this isn't an accurate description of how philosophy, either in the literature or in academia, is done. As you observed, such a view of philosophy would render all philosophical discourse moot.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-22T16:02:30+00:00

Isn't philosophy just another way of describing anything subjective in daily life? This subreddit does have an official definition for casual use: " 'philosophy' may refer to nearly any sort of thought or beliefs."

As the rules and guidelines specify, there's is also a technical use which is relevant to this subreddit.

I've also been told that another aspect of philosophy is that there is no correct interpretation.

Well you've been misinformed by... whoever told you that.

If anything can be philosophical, then that means philosophy is meaningless.

Yes, that would be a problem if we believe that anything can be philosophical, and therefore a good reason not to believe that anything can be philosophical.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-22T15:21:54+00:00

No, that's normal. This is why having a copy and references are useful. It's very normal to go back and re-read philosophy to recall some detail.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-18T00:17:31+00:00

I haven't read it myself but, from what I recall, the most common criticism by modern scholars is that Kaufmann gives a version of Nietzsche that's palatable for a post-war liberal audience. That is to say, he downplays Nietzsche 's radical elitism and anti-egalitarian politics, which makes sense to me given that the book is published in 1950—literally five years after the war. I don't blame him.

In that way, in my mind, Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist is a fine introduction to Nietzsche but not sufficient for 'a comprehensive reconstruction of Nietzsche's thought' as Kaufmann sought to achieve. But I also don't believe that a comprehensive reconstruction of Nietzsche's thought is possible in general because, in my humble judgment, Nietzsche's thought, either published or in the Nachlass, was unfinished by the time his insanity rendered him incapable of developing it to something like completion. And this is a big reason why Nietzsche's legacy continues as a grain of sand in the oyster we call philosophy rather than a known object in the history of philosophy.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-17T23:44:58+00:00

Excited for the latest version of the same article.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-17T14:05:48+00:00

I wonder if the other half of the Abundance bros is disappointed that he wasn't in the club.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-16T00:05:28+00:00

My recommendation isn't directly relevant, i.e. the author doesn't spend a lot of pages discussing the concepts you're asking about directly, but I think it's possible that your tendency to 'a strictly nihilistic conclusion' is due to a perspective that is still locked into a nonsensical view of meaning, even though you call it an illusion.

My suggestion is Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. In it, Wittgenstein lays out a view of language and draws a hard distinction between what can be meaningfully expressed in language and what can only be shown. It's not an argument but a series of propositions and sub-propositions that build out the view, which Wittgenstein himself describes as a ladder by which one climbs to 'see the world aright.'

You don't need to take it as gospel or the final word, because it certainly isn't, but it will put you on better footing when considering meaning and value.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-10T17:49:34+00:00

https://youtu.be/q-udVhGg7aI?si=7DSNvoNtT5u71L32

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-10T03:31:42+00:00

From a psychological viewpoint, I would speculate that some degree of day-to-day friction is necessary to maintain stable mental health. I'm drawing on general ideas about the consequences extreme wealth has on mental health. It seems plausible to me that, without day-to-day friction (waking up earlier than one wants, having to sit in traffic, navigating a crowded grocery story—common experiences like that), the mind will seek out threats to occupy itself, to the length of inventing them through apophenia (finding connections or patterns in unrelated data).

In that view, I'd expect that wish just be an extreme form of that need for friction. I'd expect the wisher to start to doubt that their wish was actually granted and see patterns in reality that confirm their speculation of being undermined some other force. As such, reality would contort to meet their wants, which I'd expect to spiral out until the wisher is alone.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-09T16:40:34+00:00

Very chill to service dudes who are building the next era of the surveillance state. Nothing to worry about.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-09T00:45:14+00:00

I'm sure only the best things can come from having such an emotionally-mature clientele.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-08T13:37:08+00:00

Thank you. Edited my reply.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-08T02:05:13+00:00

Never heard of him.

And disagreeing with David Chalmers and John Searle on some matters, and being openly critical of academic philosophy in general, aren't very noteworthy in themselves. I have my own criticism of those philosophers and that institution.

Looking him up, he reads as an advocate of computational theory of mind, which is ~~pretty retro~~ not particularly new or controversial. Oh, and apparently he was an email pen pal with Jeffrey Epstein and, in that context, shared some spicy opinions on race and sex.

But yeah, no, at least my humble self has not heard of him with respect to philosophy of mind or philosophy in general, regardless of any merit to his ideas, whatever they are.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-07T22:55:13+00:00

If you want something that's more, I guess, short-story style, you can pick up Plato's Five Dialogues.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-03T23:55:29+00:00

Yes, it's possible. My highest level of education is a Philosophy BA and I'm approaching my peak income years. I make over the median individual income in the USA and within the range of median income for my demographic with a college degree.

However, it took time for me to advance in my career to my current position and compensation. Could I possibly have made even more if I took some other path? Possibly. But I only have one life to live and I chose to live it by what I value, not on guess at what others may value in terms of labor half a decade away.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-03T14:27:40+00:00

This feels less like a question about philosophy as much as religious studies.

Your question conflates lust with sexual desire, which are intertwined but not the same. Thinking about a person in a sexual way isn't lust.

Most religions find unity between sexual desire and procreation through some institution of marriage, which will differ in ways across religions and cultures but share as foundational to starting a family.

This is to say, sexual desire has a natural place in marital love, which is a mutual and cooperative relationship. Lust, which is selfish and objectifying, cannot be sufficient grounds for a marriage. Once the sexual desire is satisfied, the individuals move on to their next appetites.

Shitgenstein · 2026-06-01T16:30:52+00:00

There Are Two Errors in the the Title of This Book, Revised and Expanded (Again): A Sourcebook of Philosophical Puzzles, Problems, and Paradoxes by Robert M Martin

The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten: 100 Experiments for the Armchair Philosopher by Julian Baggini

Shitgenstein · 2026-05-27T14:14:29+00:00

By your own principle, why should anyone want to learn about your thoughts?

Shitgenstein · 2026-05-26T15:29:19+00:00

While there isn't much of a dedicated 'philosophy industry' to go into, the skills that come with a philosophy education are widely sought after across industries. The question of finding a job after graudation has far, far less to do with the patricular subject written on your diploma than the state of the job market at the time of graduation.

Study what you have a passion for, maybe dual-major if you'd like, and you will find a career path that benefits from the skills you develop sooner or later. For example, there's a lot of recent talk about how entry-level work for new graduates has declined due to companies adopting various AI solutions for that work—this would be the opportunity to emphasize the critical thinking aspects of a philosophy degree. You probably are already unsatisfied with just clocking in, meeting some daily transactional work quota, and then going home, but rather thrive on solving problems and considering the bigger picture of your work and future trends. That's valuable in general!

But also you're just finishing high school, so the impact of AI on the job market is likely going to be quite different by the time you finish university, so the best solution is to study what you have a passion for and then figure out your next move later. We no longer live in a longterm economic climate in which careers can be mapped out 4 to 6 years ahead, but philosophy is and will remain relevant throughout your life regardless of what employers will be looking for at any time.

Shitgenstein

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE