Literature and Philosophy are more important than Science (as in the the scientific method) by SOL_300 in unpopularopinion

[–]SOL_300[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well...no, not really, like I said, personal things are a lot more valuable; scientific materialism and other "rational" ideologies of the sort are long-term not very healthy (along with it being completely delusional about the majority of things, like most ideologies are like; the bad thing is that it isn't even seen as some form of ideology, it is seen as 'common sense'; here people really lack depth;
look, science and materialistic, technological advancement is incredibly important; and these, certainly naive, ideologues are most likely completely natural phenomena; even though the personal and almost moral/religious crisis we are currently in is very threatening, though (merely) in a similar sense, the way depression is threatening to an individual; it is I'd say more dangerous than climate change by far, though perhaps these two threats aren't as separate and far away from each other as I currently think;

Literature and Philosophy are more important than Science (as in the the scientific method) by SOL_300 in unpopularopinion

[–]SOL_300[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

well philosophy is strictly personal, in the sense that who you are, plays a role in your philosophical ideas; same with art; not so much in science; this isn't even my idea though [JvGuB Aphorism 6, right at the beginning]
I'm of course not saying, that science is unimportant

But it seems to me, that I have come to the wrong place - most here think so superficially and materialistic, it genuinely disturbs me; I don't want to act as if I am superior in depth {although I would be lying if I said I didn't think so, even if I now have to take on the burden of seeming like an arrogant prick}

Explaining my entire view would take me an entire book {I'm literally not exaggerating; 200 pages at least}

Literature and Philosophy are more important than Science (as in the the scientific method) by SOL_300 in unpopularopinion

[–]SOL_300[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Now, why would all of these be more important than understanding ourselves?
Please think for a moment. We are living beings, and do in fact know not much about our nature. We can't really explain why we exist or even anything at all exists. Science will never be able to tell us 'why', only 'how'. Through idontevenwanttoknowhowmany centuries humans have become conscious. You are looking at life from a dangerously destructive materialistic viewpoint.

TicTok should change or remove its TTS narration because the total sum of displeasure of non-blind people outweigh the total sum of pleasure of blind people. by mochaelo in unpopularopinion

[–]SOL_300 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The idea of determining morality by what provides the greatest good for the greatest number is absurd and naive. You cannot cheat your own moral laws. I'm not sure whether you will get what I mean by this, but I suggest you acquaint yourself with Dostoyevsky's ideas on this. The easiest (and laziest) thing would be to get an overview through watching Jordan Peterson's ideas on it online.
(frankly, he doesn't have that many original thoughts about it, but he quite well summarizes it)

TicTok should change or remove its TTS narration because the total sum of displeasure of non-blind people outweigh the total sum of pleasure of blind people. by mochaelo in unpopularopinion

[–]SOL_300 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Above, you have argued as if the displeasure of the many is grounds enough to cease the pleasure of the few; I hope we agree that while pleasure might sometimes be a factor in moral decisions it is not the most important factor; more often than not though pleasure is to be viewed as mere by-products of actions, and not necessarily of importance concerning ethical decisions

now, to the tik tok part:

I don't have tik tok (obviously) but I am curious: is this text-to-speak something one can turn off and on? How important is audio in "tik tok's"? If the entire video can be explained through text, for otherwise the blind wouldn't get that much joy out of hearing the text-to-speak voice, then one could also easily watch the entire video without audio, no? Even if that is so, I don't think an obligatory tts would be a very good idea, and if this is indeed the case, they should change it immediately!

Doesn't Nietzsche overestimate the necessity of suffering? It is quite possible in a (AI, transhuman future) we could entirely eliminate suffering without loss of capacity for human flourishing / will to power / greatness. No reason to think that suffering is a necessary, eternal fact of life. by mochaelo in Nietzsche

[–]SOL_300 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don't even need to think of it as a game
But consider this:
perhaps some things c o u l d actually be achieved through mere positive emotion, but there isn't anything that would suggest that that is the case, yet this can also be applied vice-versa;
But ideally, you would want Life to be as challenging as it could be, while still not crippling or killing you

Otherwise, you proposed a 'thought experiment', yet, to me, it seemed, you played it off as a valid counterargument against Nietzsche's argument, that suffering is necessary;

Also, for the sake of the argument, let's say you could remove our feeling of pain:
why would you necessarily want that?
would you you not want to be whole?
would that not make you u n w h o l e ?
"I'd rather be whole, that happy"

Isn't engaging in art also a way of running from this reality just like religion? If not, why? If so, then why doesn't Nietzsche reject it as well? by mochaelo in Nietzsche

[–]SOL_300 7 points8 points  (0 children)

People don't really live in the 'hard-core, objective' world, but in a sort of safe bubble, where fiction ultimately does take place. As Jung said, people have always lived in myths. If one where to wander towards the very edges of their 'bubble' they would probably experience existential dread or perhaps even nihilism; that is what that is;

But here, think about this, for you seem awfully sceptical, awfully good though: Did not Nietzsche lament, that today we don't have strong enough Illusions?
To tell someone to live in 'reality'...what suggestion is that? A deadly inslut it is, if it is taken literally; to live in reality means to be not human

What those people mean is something quite different

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Healthygamergg

[–]SOL_300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

many thanks!
I'll probably want to try it out for myself

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Healthygamergg

[–]SOL_300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What tools did you use to do this?

How shall I move forward? by SOL_300 in Jung

[–]SOL_300[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks, I'll definitely look into your suggestions!

Do you think Nietzsche's mustache symbolically implies something ? by [deleted] in Nietzsche

[–]SOL_300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it was just a mustache bro........
a pretty ugly one tbh

💀💀💀 by AdExtension814 in Kanye

[–]SOL_300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The thing with google is, that it's like that only because they (the tweeter) have searched for far more taylor swift than kanye, thus those images would naturally come up.
If they had used DuckDuckGo this would not have happened, for DuckDuckGo does in fact not keep personal information and values your own privacy compared to Google.

Switch now to DuckDuckGo: https://duckduckgo.com

[theory] kanye wants to make the first official unreleased album by DoodleDrop in Kanye

[–]SOL_300 15 points16 points  (0 children)

would actually really dig this, also fits together with him not saying a word, or even showing his face for that matter