#dead philosophers society

[sweetlullabyebye]

Dead Poets but as philosophic stuff because I'm desesperately trying to learn this shit and nothing is sticking to my brain:

Neil: existencialism, specifically absurdism. Basically, life has no meaning, so you can either accept it or not. There is no greater goal or anything. Includes thinkers such as Camus or Sartre.

Todd (mostly at the start of the movie): determinism, which is kind of the opposite of existencialism, since the idea is a 'everything was planned out before and you cannot change it' type of mindset. It excludes freedom of choice, since your decisions have very little impact over everything. You're just in a boat in a storm and you have very little control over anything.

Charlie: hedonism, which is the pursuit of pleasures and the avoidance of pain. According to this idea, you'd take action depending on how much pleasure or pain you'd get from it.

Cameron: utilitarianism, or acting in a way to maximize happiness for the biggest amount of people. Includes philosophers such as Bentham or John Stuart Mill. Examples of utilitarism could be: if you were a train conductor and you had to either

stay on tracks, do nothing and hit a group of people that were on the rails

change your trajectory and instead hit one person

what would you do? Well according to utilitarism you would change trajectory, as it would benefit the greatest amount of people.

Meeks: rationalism and consequentialism. Tbh I don't really understand rationalism, but from what I know, its basis is that reason is a source of knowledge and stuff. Consequentialism is interest in the consequences of one's actions; realistic consequences. So before you act you think of the consequences kind-of-thing.

Pitts: solipsism, according to which the only thing that exists for sure is the thinker. I don't really get how it's different from Descartes 'i think therefore i am', but so solipsism would mean that you can only be convinced of your own existence.

Knox: idealism; reality, perception, ideas etc are all linked, and ideas represent a reality. I didn't really listen during this part of the lesson tbh -which is why I have to revise now using things like this post-.

Mr. Keating: stoicism; accept that some things are out of control, and act in a way so to do right by others and stuff. A stoist philosopher was, for example, Crysipus, who died laughing at his own joke.

Chris: eudaemonism, which is similar to hedonism, except that happiness is seen as a logical finality and it's basically a fact that most people want happiness. So it's happiness instead of pleasures that is pursued, with philosophers such as Epicurus.

Mr. Perry (not a Dead Poet but the only person I could think of for this): deontology, which is like a set of rules around duties and obligations, and has as a goal to preserve future generations. Idk he doesn't totally fit deontology but I had no one else in mind. Anyways I hate Mr. Perry and I hate learning philosophy.

[jasonjournal]

I just watched Dead Poets Society for the first time and I just -

[hiyutekivigil]

serial experiments lain (1998)

[fizzy-watches-and-listens]

The Poets as philosophers

Meeks - René Descartes

I just know this guy has to reason everything logically, i think descartes is such a good choice

Pitts - Diogenes

This guy is the sweetest and 100% a cynic, deffo agrees with Diogenes views on virtue

Cameron - Marcus Aurelius

You cannot tell me that this man does not subscribe to stoicism, he just does, he has a copy of ‘meditations’ with the covers hanging off

Charlie - Albert Camus

He is the epitome of absurdism, he is sisyphus happy!

Todd - Friedrich Nietzsche

I don’t think he’s a full on nihilist but definitely interested in existentialism but todd agrees 100% with nietzsche on god and the soul (religious trauma bbg)

Neil - Heraclitus

Definitely resonates with ‘becoming but never being’ and finds all his theories really interesting

[stantheanomaly]

Especially to ourselves

[yourworldiseternallycomplete]

actually not a bit i love talking about suicide i think its so important to talk about suicide

[nymphpens]

Philosophers and Gays on a random Tuesday:

[theladwhoisweird]

Always the angel, never the god

[lesewut]

‘It can be considered as a sad disaster, that no philosophy, no religion, no ideology, lead to a peaceful and healthy world.’

"Nietzsche and his Christian Worldview“ is presented by Karl Jaspers in 1938 (a lecture in the context of Wissenschaftlicher Predigerverein Hannover), who was pen pal of Hannah Arendt and mental Student of Max Weber. The other book is a collection of selected writings of Nietzsche, also published in 1938. Both not of antiquarian value, but can be used as credentials to underdraw the failure of all promises of salvation.

 'In truth,there was only one Christian and he died on the cross.'

Every try to draw near to Nietzsche‘s philosophy and opinion, will stay insufficient. For understanding Nietzsche it is obligatory to understand his contradiction, to understand the discrepancy as a pretence-function. The 'completeness' of his philosophical claim, can just be expressed in this way of antinomy: Between drastic apodictic claims and endless dialectic of all abolishing possibilities.

Nietzsche also saws his current epoch in a crisis. The sinking of culture The replacement of education by merely knowing about education The permanent search for ways to compensate the mental loss of substance („seelischer Substanzverlust“) Universal acting and Living in the 'as if' (das Leben im „als ob“) The anaestesia of boredom by rush and sensation […] and in the noise of mind-simulation, everything is talking, all is ignored and missed by non-existent listeners, all is 'over discussed' to the point of losing importance and significance. And in the dullness of breathless acquisition, in the clamour of the masses, which are feeding the machinery that will in the end consume them, nobody is noticing the big event:

God is dead.

This phrase was too often miscontrusted as godlessness, it has to be seen more as an ontological perception of human existence in so called modern world.

Why is God dead? Should be the next question and Nietzsche would answer:

Because of Christianity.

In Nietzsche’s world-view, the interaction of Christian values and methods to 'overcome' the lies and hypocrisy are not to underestimate.

As Nietzsche himself had both parents descend from pastor families, he explains the distance from Christian Religion, especially the inner scepticism of German protestants, by the fact that they have lost their believe as they noticed the errors of what was preached and what was put into practrice.

But Nietzsche’s hostility is not holistically integrated into his basic experience, as he is using Christian value system for his theory of world-history:

The Universality, Unity, Coherence, Will for Truth (as a Symbol between Logos and Alogon, here the antinomy again) and the Christian Propulsion as the energy for break with all the falseness, because the deeply relfected thinker reveals this fanatism of rigid adherence on a world-immance of the One, that does not exist.

The reflected person, educates himself and is willingly disturbing the sure thought being.

With his restless thoughts, that will not give him comfort in determination, because the human will percieve a higher essence of being in „Nicht-Festgestelltheit“ (~ Not-Determinedness)

The Human will be alone, but he will reach new highs without a goddess, all beauty and all knowledge will be brought back to him, to us (auf-uns-Selbst-zurückrufen), he himself will be brought back into himself.

Out of the deepness of historicity of humanity, there will be fullfilled freedoms, because he will be the present, brought back into himself (sich-Selbst-geschenkt-werden).

Not only for Nietzsche is the distortion of Christianity, the reverse of what was true for Jesus.

It is generally underrated how Nietzsche is drawing an Image of Jesus, to exhibit defects of what the Christian Religion did with the ethical rules of behaviour Jesus exemplified.

„Im Grunde hab es nur einen Christen und der starb am Kreuz.“

Whereas Jesus embodied the ressentiment (of all Humiliated and Insulted, the resentement of the Powerless, the decandence of those, who will ruin themselves „Sich-Selbst-zu-Grunde-richten“),

the later Interpretation reduced the Symbol of a new humanistic ethic into faith.

Faith turned into doctrine and the symbol 'anouncement of the infinite bliss' was decreased into „lauter Sachen und Personen, statt der Symbole, lauter Riten und Dogmen, statt einer Praxis des Lebens.“

With Paulus impact Jesus was turned to the figure of the saviour, in the foreground the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. And because the disciples of Jesus searched for an Explanation, because earthly Born can not bear the bottomless and the inexplicable, they searched for ways for atoning the crime, a method for expiating the sin, so they asked how could have this [injustice] happen?

It has to happen this way, God gave his son as a sacrifice for our sins.

„Nichts ist unchristlicher als die kirchlichen Kruditäten von der Gott als Person, von einem Reich Gottes, welcher kommt von einem Himmelsreich, jenseits, von einem ‚Sohn Gottes‘, der zweiten Person der Trinität … Das ist alles im welthistorischen Zynismus die Verhöhnung des Symbols.“

Nietzsche situates the destructive lie in Christianity, that made the Ancient Greek wisdom in vain, destroyed the Imperium Romanum, annihilated the progess of Islam scholarship and wisdom, the progress and humanistic ideas of the Renaissance and is till today blurring the striving of the individual to forefeel the truth, because the Christian demand on historical Totalwissen is paralyzing by tracing the Golden Age back to a long past time (ironically Nietzsche also, as he is proclaiming the historical highlight of humanity in pre-Socratic Greece, the up-lifting era of tragedy).

Nietzsche wants to establish a new philosophy, a countermovement, the nihilism for washing the humanity pure from all the attached and purported sins and fictions. Following the esperance to give the human an higher self by finding himself, without searching for himself, by drawing near to truth, without fixing and degenerating it. And Nietzsche is detecting, like other Übergangsmenschen, that science will also be instrumentalised and its content filled like previous dogmatic doctrines.

Now a personal train of thoughts: It gives me a feeling of unease, when ´Modern world´ is praised and labelled with concepts, which lack more and more authorization in the practice.

When neo-liberal economy, military re-armament, increased importance of biopolitics, parliamentary reduction of jurisdiction, hypersensitization of (mental) diseases […] are considered as absolutely necessary for maintenance of democratic governmental system, a more or less reflecting human-being is seeking for a debate culture, a professional (and thereofore unbiased) exchange of interdisciplinary methods of analysis.

It will remain difficult to establish a criticial discourse, even till today propagandistic instruments are used for formation of opinion, not just in countries like China, Russia or Turkey, but also in countries we would consider as intented to ensure freedom of speech, as economic interests are dictating  the course and purposely replacing fundamental ethical principles (war and aggression are always to condemn, every armed conflict is a sign of humaneness failure !!! )

The world of our humanity is still not able to find sustainable solutions for the majour issues (Global Climate Crisis; rising gap between rich and poor; imprudent consumerism; Extensive Surveillance & Big Data, just to name a few...) of our future.

It can be considered as a sad disaster, that no philosophy, no religion, no ideology, lead to a peaceful and healthy world.

It could be so easy, if basic maxims, would have born in fruit. If the `Golden Rule´, which can be traced back till Ancient Egypt and India, would have been truely assimilated into soul and heart.

`Thou shalt not kill‘, but still today, mothers lose their children and women become willows.

O- we have wonderful definitions of peace and harmony, we were endowed by evolution with this present called reason, to order and tame the forces of nature, to make our lives more and more comfortable.

Equal we are born, but the place of birth is separating us, no equal chances and opportunities to actively improve our way of living, pushing the envelope with sincere effort to the limit of our mental and physical flexibility.

Indisputable are also the systematical limitations, in the modern world, science will be exploited for politcal and economic concerns. In a world, where  'God is Dead' , the seeking human can not find rest bottomless and abysmal, as long as he is not able to find home within himself.

It seems that science will constantly shoulder more and more responsibility and this development could improve prudent valuation and therefore a healthy basis for all live on earth.

But as science is the daughter of Philosophy, it must be reviewed and verified by Ethics Council (my Suggestion: Compiled by financial-independent international supervisory authorities of all areas of life and different vocational sectors, crossing all cultural and age-group section). It will stay a dream, to imagine a world without wars and greed, but if every single one could end the war within himself, I think there would be no war outside the own body and mind.

'Error is something rare in individuals, but it is the rule in groups, parties, peoples, times.'

[Trying to fix a conception of how an individual can improve himself. No Completeness, very messy, here and there some teardrop disturbing the scripture !!! :') Never meet my own requirements :( ]

[theres-whump-in-that-nebula]

Okay. I’m going away again; bye!

[chriscarpediem14]

Todd Anderson was right; truth is like a blanket that always leaves your feet cold - which is why I use *a second blanket*

[ivan-fyodorovich-k]

now I can’t even remember why I went to youtube

[cool-thymus]

Obito's reading list

[if this post is about Obito's taste in literature then why is he asleep, and it's Kakashi doing the reading, you might ask? Well, i believe Obito's reading habits are healthy, while our boy Kakashi here can't simply put his smut down in the dead of night. Also, Obito might be woken up soon by... y'know]

Anyway, i was typing a reply to @hairybeardtongue 's idea about what books Obito would enjoy reading and got inspired ٩(｡•́‿��̀｡)۶ (my personal post-war Obito headcanons below the cut)

Definitely! I can see Tobito going a full-blown Machiavelli mode. He must've read it in his villain era (that would explain some of his evil-but-proficient management choices).

But if we speak post-war, Obito will have to find his place again in the ninja world (which is still a mess despite Kakashi's impeccable hokageing). He'll need to catch up on all those years of denying the reality, break the delusions and prejudice he's been fostering all his adult life. I like to believe that he'll find solace in the written word and try to challenge the existing dogma. He might've lost his chakra privilege, but his mind is as sharp as ever, so why not have Kakashi deliver all the books and scrolls he requires to figure out the world he chose to save. In one of my post-war obkk aus Obito becomes a philosopher and provides valuable theoretical basis for Kakashi's and Naruto's executive hokage decisions. What if the guy who almost destroyed it all found a way to end the war-is-all-you-need dictatorship peacefully? (that would make more sense than brutally killing him for the second time, Kishi!)

As for leisure reading ("Pleasure reading!" Kakashi, please don't interrupt), I believe Obito'd enjoy stories about a wanderer who is always on the move and contemplates the world in all its beauty and messiness. (i'm thinking about Mushishi somehow xD) If the Sage of Six Paths published an autobiography, Obito would want to read it too probably. He might even enjoy Jiraya's Tale of the Utterly Gutsy Shinobi! Can you imagine how happy Kakashi'd be to learn that Obito finally decided to read his favorite author?! (he is this close to making him read the Icha-Icha series, who knows, maybe one day...)

Another curious aspect is Obito's seal-free heart, from now on vulnerable and open to compassion and strong emotions. Would that prompt him to read tragic novels to experience the catharsis of vicariously reliving grief, sadness, desperation, or hope? I think he might ("Return of the Crybaby!" dude, please). And whenever he's overwhelmed with his ideas destined to fix the society or sheds too many tears over some dramatic fiction, there's always Kakashi to lean on and rest while those nimble fingers massage his head so very soothingly.

[hiyutekivigil]

present day. present time.

どこに行ってもみんな繋がってる

[crownedwithstars]

Hot Takes and Conspiracy Theories About the Silm by Fourth Age Gondorians

(this post stemmed from the idea of the Silm as a part of some very ancient manuscripts Tolkien was just translating, and how it may compare to real world epics like Edda - stories that may have started as poems and songs written down centuries after the fact in a completely different mode and by someone with very different cultural background than the original context of the poems and possibly with motives about promoting himself or his ancestors. so what if this was how Fourth Age Gondorians regarded the Silm as well and had schools of thought and self-taught enthusiasts debating what the stories actually mean? what kind of takes would they come up with?)

The Two Trees

Valinor did not have some special light-emanating trees and they did not actually die, it's just a nature myth that metaphorically talks about a period when the sky literally darkened; this was caused by some unknown natural disaster (like the explosion of a supervolcano).

references to Tree-light and Elves being enhanced by it is just Noldorin propaganda. 

The Silmarils were not real. At least not as they are portrayed in the Silm. 

there are various theories as to what they really were (religious artifacts? some mandate of rulership? just really pretty jewels and everybody exaggerated how special they were? some kind of a super weapon?), but also more philosophical suggestions that the Silmarils are the elements of air, water and earth itself (hint hint that's why they eventually become part of these), and the struggle over them represents the struggle over rulership of Beleriand/Middle-earth. that in the end the Silmarils aren't really possessed by anyone reflects how all kingdoms eventually fall and nobody under Eru can be a master of the world. 

Fëanor was not a real guy and the sons of Fëanor were not actually related to one another.

like who even is that great and perfect?

he's probably just some kind of a bogeyman made up by the Sindar

did anyone in Beleriand ever even see him? CONVENIENT that he spontaneously combusted almost immediately after he came to Beleriand

also who names their kid "the spirit of fire"??? what if it's not a personal name of any elf but more like a title? or a name associated with some entity that had religious following in Valinor?

there's a clue to this in how Fëanor's supposed sons are mostly referred to as "the sons of Fëanor" or "Fëanorians": it bears thinking that they were not actually related to one another, but "Fëanorian" was a title in a same way that "Fëanor" was a title. It doesn't mean an ACTUAL son to a guy named Fëanor but a devotee to whatever the entity or title named Fëanor represented. 

(they couldn't be real brothers because there just can't be that many hair colours in one family.)

MAYBE FËANORIANS WERE SOME KIND OF A CULT

it was probably some kind of a death cult obsessed with blood and murder, considering their body count 

also because of this they were kicked out of Valinor and all stories about how they WANTED to leave are propaganda. 

Celeborn was at least three or four different guys.

How else do you explain the different versions about who he was?

the one who fathered Celebrían was Galadriel's real true love, but he died in obscure circumstances

this theory you don't really want to talk about much, because you don't want to insult Queen Arwen. Also the current Celeborn may come after you. 

Beren did not actually die and come back

his first death is a symbolic one: he had been estranged from his relatives and people, but by marrying Lúthien he completely leaves behind that life and "dies" as a member of the House of Bëor to become a part of the House of Elwe

he did not come again among Men after marrying Lúthien, in other words he was dead to his original society

the sequence in Mandos where Lúthien pleads for pity was originally a description of a courting scene that got bastardised along the way; she had to go to the remaining members of the House of Bëor and ask for Beren's hand in marriage. They would not agree unless Beren gave up his claim to the title of chieftain, i. e. he has symbolically died. 

Melian was actually Ungoliant

that's why Doriath lasted so long, Morgoth was still scared shitless of her and didn't dare go anywhere near her

Nan Dunghortheb was literally her backyard!!!

why else Lúthien would be able to weave weird dream cloaks???

Húan wasn't a dog, he was an Elf

the idea that he was a dog came from: 

he was the best tracker in Aman, so in Beleriand he was called "The Hound of Valinor". Later generations thought this literally meant he was a dog.  

whoever wrote down the legends about him was a wishful idiot who loved dogs and wanted them to be able to talk (understandable)

Something Weird Was Going On With Maeglin

aside from the obvious, of course

were Aredhel and Eöl really his parents though? was Aredhel even married to Eöl? 

maybe Maeglin was a thrall of Morgoth, or was born in captivity and brainwashed to be loyal, and his task from the beginning was to bring Gondolin down

Aredhel did leave Gondolin like the Silm says, but stuff did not go down like the story tells. 

-during her wanderings, Aredhel somehow found Maeglin and saw him as her shot to stage a coup in Gondolin by claiming he was her son (and male heir for the kingdom). Eöl never existed. Or if he did, he was a random guy Aredhel met and used to her own ends. 

Turgon found out about Aredhel's plans (but not about Maeglin) and he was the one who actually killed her.

maybe she was a Fëanorian cult member in secret and was trying to take over Gondolin for them

Túrin son of Húrin, Mormegil, Turambar and the other aliases associated with The Children of Húrin were actually all different guys

nobody can get up to that much weird shit

the real Túrin probably died in Doriath and Melian covered it up

Elured and Elurin survived. They changed their names and became Elrond and Elros. 

Maglor is the Bigfoot of Middle-earth. There is a dedicated fanclub that keeps track of sightings (which are as obscure and bonkers as you could imagine). 

if you subscribe to "Fëanorians were a death cult" theory, then Maglor is actually an ominous cryptid that foretells misfortunes. 

Thingol is alive and lives as a hermit somewhere in Mirkwood.

Thranduil is aware of it and in fact he has helped to keep it secret all this time.

There are also hot takes about Eärendil and Elwing and whether they were real people. 

Eärendil is a half-elf, actual Star and God's favourite little guy. He has a flying ship and travels in space. He keeps an eye on Satan himself. His birth was foretold, he fought and killed the biggest dragon in history in a massive air battle that caused an entire mountain to collapse, and he may have killed Ungoliant. No real person is that special. 

Elwing wouldn't do what bunch of men (who were maybe in a death cult) told her, she's obviously a villain if she existed. She can't die (was directly prevented by divine powers when she tried to) and chose to be immortal. Also being God's favourite little gal and having the ability to turn into a bird? Very suspicious. 

Silmarien and her descendants were the true heirs of Númenor and if they had ruled, Númenor would still exist

the ruling line had many problematic characters that were not well suited to the role

it also culminated in Ar-Pharazon and all the tragedy that his actions brought

Silmarien inherited some of the most important heirlooms from the First Age, which proves that even her father thought she was the true heir

also Silmarien's descendants survived to maintain was what left of the culture and wisdom of Númenor; further proof of Silmarien's right.

[helslastangel]

Yeah I think when it comes to men and their big 6 placements the only water sign i like being around is Cancer. Especially Cancer + Sagittarius or Cancer + Leo heavy charts. Pisces would be cool if they didn't sit back like lazy Greek philosophers and make me do the chasing, big ick ... I'm the woman here, jeez. But Scorpio just makes me downright uncomfortable and exhausted.

Every word I say to Scorpio sun, moon, mars, or Mercury men just gets taken so far out of context or interpreted in the most intense and negative or weird way possible with SO many words put in my mouth that I did not say. It's like trying to date a criminal lawyer who has been hired to defend anyone BUT you. Constantly have to be clarifying, and correcting, you start thinking of disclaimers for everything you say and holding back because you could tell a man with heavy Scorpio placements that you don't like chocolate ice cream, and instead of saying "Oh really? Aww that's a shame I love it" or "lmao I hate it too" like a fucking normal person they gotta say some shit like "oh so do you think that maybe you have some subconscious conditioning against the darkest flavor of ice cream because of how society treats minorities? It seems you might have some self-hatred going on, you should work on that"

Like... seriously dawg? No. It's ice cream. Chocolate is a flavor I merely do not like in ice cream. What in the Wattpad-reddit-pilled world is wrong with you?

And yes I'm generalizing in this moment cuz this kind of shit has happened with every Scorpio sun/moon/mercury/mars and occasionally venus I've ever dealt with. For a very long time.

It seems to be less common with Scorpio risings, thank God. They get the whole cool dark aura without the rest of this shit.

Now I'm kind of worried that I come off like this to other people as a Scorpio Venus even though that is the only Scorpio placement in my personal planets (my other placements are in Jupiter, Pluto, Node, and Juno).

I do experience this a tiny bit with Scorpio-heavy women too but honestly not nearly as heavy-handed with it. I can be friends with Scorpio-dominant women. I need frequent breaks and maybe couldn't handle dating one but it's not even half as draining at all.

Scorpio placement women seem to know how to dole this shit out in doses or raise the heat slowly. Like imagine being a frog; a Scorpio-heavy woman will put you in a little pot and turn up the heat slowly so at least by the time you're cooked you're already dead tbh like it's the definition of being killed softly but Scorpio-heavy men will just boil the water in the back while you're happily ribbiting on their shoulder having no idea they're about to yeet you into the pot with a sling slot. Like man if you don't put me back on my lilypad and leave me alone

I love my Cancer + fire sign men, they're just moody and whiny and respond to food and belly rubs like cats. I can deal with that.

I'm just really annoyed rn sorry y'all 😘