What is Philosophy?

Satyr wrote:

Don't waste your time.

I hope she listens to your grand, powerful wisdom.

You can have the last word for the day, go ahead.

Æon wrote:

I'm so scared.  You intimidate me and I respect you, greatly.

Like you had a choice?

Quote :

Lyssa, also, respects you, more than me.  She is young and needs your guidance, guide her....away from me, as you just did.

Make sure she never responds to my threads again.  You're doing her a real favor, good work.

How scared you are of me... coward.

The sight of you pleading Satyr to keep me from you is very... un-come-ly... lolz

Remember, because I have deafeated you once, its already established.
I don't have to prove it again.

Æon wrote:

Lyssa,

Wrong.

Cum guzzling sperm burpin' whore more like it...
I'm only here to impress the men... never doubt that.

Quote :

Take any individual cell, and is it not a tiny part of a larger organism?

How did it become so turkey?

Answer.

Tell me what a cell is first.

EXPLORE.

Its what a philosopher does.

What is a cell?

Lyssa wrote:

How scared you are of me...  coward.

Close your eyes.....
listen to the sound of my words....the typing on the keyboard, the rhythm is making you drowsy...

You feel tired, sleeeeepy....

You are wrooooong, do not doubt it.....
I aaaam right, my wooooords seductive buzz-saws cutting your resistances aaaaassuuuunder.....

Do not doubt me, child....
I am your master....you are my slaaaaave.

When I snap my fingers, or tap my screen, you will awaken. Feeling refreshed, happy, horny....hungry for guidance and a penis.
Do not resist this sensation....follow it to where I liiiiive....on the west coast.
I will be waiting for you on platform shows, wearing a clown's rotating bow-tie....

When I spin it you will become wet...and wild.
You will fall under the spell of my wooooords......wooooords....
Nooothing I say will sound neeedy, ridiculous, pathetic....it will be philosophical, genius....unique.

Lyssa wrote:

perpetualburn wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

There are women who are both beautiful and intelligent and content to rule through their sons and grandsons. They are "philosophical enough" to let their heirs DO the philosophy.

In the ideal,

To marry a woman is to marry your highest hope. Because you generate possibility, only a woman can redeem a possibility into a world and grant you freedom. She is your redemption.

To marry a man is to marry your strongest refuge. Because you have seen into the crevices, into the patterns that will blossom into a flower, you wish to give the world a chance, to conserve that memory that is You, only a man can protect it from oblivion, by shaping that fate to a destiny, by giving her his Name. He is her salvation.

Nietzsche wrote:

"The female intellect. - Women's intellect is manifested as perfect control, presence of mind, and utilization of all advantages. They bequeath it as their fundamental character to their children, and the father furnishes the darker background of will. His influence determines the rhythm and harmony, so to speak, to which the new life is to be played out; but its melody comes from the woman.
To say it for those who know how to explain a thing: women have the intelligence, men the heart and passion. This is not contradicted by the fact that men actually get so much farther with their intelligence: they have the deeper, more powerful drives; these take their intelligence, which is in itself something passive, forward. Women are often privately amazed at the great honor men pay to their hearts.
When men look especially for a profound, warm-hearted being, in choosing their spouse, and women for a clever, alert, and brilliant being, one sees very clearly how a man is looking for an idealized man, and a woman for an idealized woman--that is, not for a complement, but for the perfection of their own merits." [HATH, 411]

Nietzsche wrote:

But I will admit that the greatest objection to 'eternal return,' my truly abysmal thought is always my mother and sister.

I have a suspicion that no one loves anything as much as a mother loves a well turned out son... to the point of suffering him, to the point of risking his immortality. And yet the violence inherent in a mother's love is carried into the eternal return.

Lyssa wrote:

Like you had a choice?

Choice is possibility, freedom, power. Those with limited possibilities, have limited choice, limited power.

Those like you.

Lyssa wrote:

How scared you are of me... coward.

How has this thread progressed so far? Satyr warns you, stay away. "Don't bother." Yet you disobey your master. Why not listen to his commands, or, suggestions? Satyr claims that he is a watcher, a "voyeur", is this true? Or does he not step in, and speak, to you?

After he warned you, didn't he issue me a warning? "Speak as I approve of, or you end up in the dungeon"?

Threats not so subtle anymore. Now backtrack, I want to see the both of you walk backward.

Can you deny the print in writing, in quote?

Satyr wrote:

Don't waste your time.

Satyr wrote:

....and you know where you'll be going....again.

I'm shaking, quivering in my boots. Such dangerous threats. Do as I say, and you will be "safe".

This thread is overflowing with....hypocrisy. Who is the bully here? Who is innocent, victim? Who claims to bully the bullies?

Ha, continue your attempts to derail the thread. What is philosophy, do you remember the question?

Stay on topic, boys and girls, children.

perpetualburn wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

perpetualburn wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

There are women who are both beautiful and intelligent and content to rule through their sons and grandsons. They are "philosophical enough" to let their heirs DO the philosophy.

In the ideal,

To marry a woman is to marry your highest hope. Because you generate possibility, only a woman can redeem a possibility into a world and grant you freedom. She is your redemption.

To marry a man is to marry your strongest refuge. Because you have seen into the crevices, into the patterns that will blossom into a flower, you wish to give the world a chance, to conserve that memory that is You, only a man can protect it from oblivion, by shaping that fate to a destiny, by giving her his Name. He is her salvation.

Nietzsche wrote:

"The female intellect. - Women's intellect is manifested as perfect control, presence of mind, and utilization of all advantages. They bequeath it as their fundamental character to their children, and the father furnishes the darker background of will. His influence determines the rhythm and harmony, so to speak, to which the new life is to be played out; but its melody comes from the woman.
To say it for those who know how to explain a thing: women have the intelligence, men the heart and passion. This is not contradicted by the fact that men actually get so much farther with their intelligence: they have the deeper, more powerful drives; these take their intelligence, which is in itself something passive, forward. Women are often privately amazed at the great honor men pay to their hearts.
When men look especially for a profound, warm-hearted being, in choosing their spouse, and women for a clever, alert, and brilliant being, one sees very clearly how a man is looking for an idealized man, and a woman for an idealized woman--that is, not for a complement, but for the perfection of their own merits." [HATH, 411]

Nietzsche wrote:

But I will admit that the greatest objection to 'eternal return,' my truly abysmal thought is always my mother and sister.

I have a suspicion that no one loves anything as much as a mother loves a well turned out son... to the point of suffering him, to the point of risking his immortality.  And yet the violence inherent in a mother's love is carried into the eternal return.

Quote :

"Mothers. - Animals think differently about females than humans do; they consider the female to be the productive being. There is no paternal love among them, only something like love for the children of a beloved and a getting used to them. In their children females have a satisfaction of their desire to dominate, a possession, an occupation, something that is totally intelligible to them and can be prattled with: all this taken together is motherly love - it is to be compared to the love of an artist for his work." [N., JW, 72]

Philosopher,

Read and observe, this "female philosopher" accuses me of being you. She cannot see the difference. She doesn't realize that I become you. I earn my title of Philosopher. I earn my name. She claims that I "already am" you. She claims, that I claim, that I have already achieved philosophy hood. I am a philosopher.

I am Philosopher.

This is her belief and thought. She hasn't read the thread, as definitively written. She is battling a dæmon within her own mind, a phantasm. After she accuses me of being you, she then attempts to doubt my doubt with silly, childish questions. Have I doubted I am a man? Have I doubted the sun revolves around the earth? Have I doubted that I am excellent? If she had read the thread, then she would have seen, that I already implied all these questions. It should become more than obvious that I have doubted All, at least, attempted to. I have doubted anything she offers. She detects a weakness, as she should.

Isn't doubt a weakness? Isn't a representation of fear and lack of confidence? Isn't self doubt an invitation to predators to attack you? Aren't you the weakest man, Philosopher? You are so full of doubt.

But what these fools fail to realize, is that doubt leads to understanding, discovery, and knowledge. You learn your values by doubting. You learn your limits, what you can doubt or are willing to doubt. Some values you will doubt greatly, others less so. I implored these faggots, these children, to learn philosophy and learn doubt. But do they? No.

Lyssa is too infatuated with her vanity and narcissism as well as her political allegiances. Witness how she immediately focuses on resets to politics. That's what philosophy is to her. That is what you are to her, Philosopher. You are a politician, not a man to learn from, or lead into the unknown. She desires to pull you back to society, into the realm of the already known, the a priori. This is where she hopes to make her home, in the undoubted safety of society.

Predictable, can't you guess what she'll do next, and which area she will attack in hopes of a weakness?

After her interlude into politics, pathetically attempting to differentiate the two topics with the question "what is a cell?" she went into the ad hominen attacks. "I'm better than you." Who, the fuck, cares? Better at what, superior at what, above what? Above doubt? Above philosophy? Lyssa is a misguided, little, child girl. She clings onto Satyr's guidance and direction. Satyr, on one hand, brags about how he "watches" and does not step in, while simultaneously whispering into his little girl's ears "Don't bother". Yes, he is so innocent. When you point out the hypocrisy? "I will throw you in the dungeon". An obvious threat.

Pathetic, Philosopher, these two are quite pathetic. Watch and perhaps learn, I hope to teach you something, Philosopher. I hope to learn, myself.

Æon wrote:

You do not fear what you know.  You know the sun will rise tomorrow.  If you doubted this premise, and actually disbelieved the sun will rise tomorrow, then you would change everything about your life right now.  You would prepare for death.  Because that's what's implied by the sun not rising.  The earth would stop rotating or be in another situation where the sun does not "rise" based on human perspectives.

You function, every morning, on the premise that the sun rises tomorrow.

Lyssa already dodged this question, like a coward.  Will you do the same?  How does a human only "33% believe" the sun will rise tomorrow?  Explain this.

People do not fear what they know.  However, familiarity breeds contempt.

Holy fucking Moses on a carousel...
Are you able to focus for a second and pay attention to what I've asked you?

Æon wrote:

After I learn and know all about airplanes, I no longer fear flying, because I control the plane.  I know what its malfunctions are.  I know how to escape in a parachute.  I know the ins and outs.

Thirsty wrote:

How can you say that you no longer fear flying if our "operating system" is based on fear?

We're talking about fear and the things which you've learnt, right?

So, I've asked you a question, and everything what you have to do is to focus on the topic and be specific, go right to the point, be precise and just answer the question.

But look what you have done - you're all over the place with your hypothetical situations - "the sun will rise tomorrow", "prepare for death", even the Earth might stop rotating. On top of that, you've also managed to inject a few words about Lyssa.

AND, ironically, you're asking if I'm going to dodge the question.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]




Let's try again.

Only because you have learnt how to control the plane and how to use a parachute, it doesn't mean that you got rid of fear.


Imagine that you're sitting in cockpit.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]






What is the reason that you react when you hear a beeping sound?
What is the reason behind the very first reaction you have, LONG before you form some kind of thoughts and understand what is going on?


Couriosity?

Joy?


What is it? Explain this.

Thirsty wrote:

What is the reason that you react when you hear a beeping sound?
What is the reason behind the very first reaction you have, LONG before you form some kind of thoughts and understand what is going on?


Couriosity?

Joy?


What is it? Explain this.

The presumption is that the pilot knows the ins and outs of his own plane. Do you understand this premise? Do you understand that pilots do not just appear out of nowhere, magically? Do you understand that knowledge is a requirement, a prerequisite, to fly? I presume that you know this underlying context.

Now, given that a pilot knows everything about his plane, a beeping noise will be familiar to him. He will have heard it before. He will know, as quickly as possible, the type of alarm. Is he alert? Is he sober? Is he awake and not sleep deprived? Define the specific context.

If the pilot is a rookie, or, maybe the pilots were murdered by terrorists aboard the planet. Maybe the pilot is a passenger who has come to the control, to land the plane in an emergency. Maybe the pilot had a heart attack and died. Who is the pilot?

If the pilot does not know the planet, the beeping noise, how to fly, etc., then yes, fear will overflow. Because this person probably will die, without the knowledge of how to fly. And even with the knowledge, fear is still a factor. But it is less of a factor. A pilot can control fear, using knowledge as the deterrent.


I must question your basic intellectual abilities. So far, you have not offered a good faith presentation here. You add no context. You complain about your own lack of context, and you are going slightly off topic. How does fear and knowledge interact? Ask yourself this, before responding again. What is the effect of extreme knowledge, knowing all the ins and outs? What happens when the pilot is experienced, most knowledgeable, and wisest? Won't he be aware of his plane, its most common malfunctions, its quality, its safety, its fuel level, its wear and tear, its best flying altitude, its best maneuvers? Yes, he knows all of these factors.

That is the result of knowledge. You know. You are a aware. You are responsive. You have experience. You have, already, overcome obstacles. You know, through experience. You have flown hundreds of planes. You know your plane. You know your crew. You know yourself. You know everything about the situation. You know the beeping noises. You know what to do. You know your objective. You know the nearest landing areas. You know what to do in an emergency.

You know.

Do you know what knowledge is??? I do. The above proves that I do. I add context where you lack. I demonstrate your ignorance, for you. I compensate for your lack.

Newcomers to the thread,

Don't enter this thread like a bitch or ingrate. Come in here, open minded, prepared to do philosophy. Do philosophy. Philosophize. Know the Philosopher as I do, attempt to become Him. Become a philosopher. Females, obviously as we've demonstrated, cannot become Him, due to the aforementioned reasons. But females can still watch and learn, be "entertained" I suppose. Be a part of the crowd, a cheerleader, rooting for your men, as Lyssa roots for Satyr. Cheer him on. Females, know your place as you know yourselves.

Men, what is a good faith argument? Why is "good faith" important to philosophy, opposed to "bad doubt"? What is the relationship between doubt and faith? On what grounds do you stand, why are you here? Do you have a grudge, do you hold onto it? Are you here to learn, degrade, teach, what? What is your objective?

Understand these questions. Ask and answer. Realize that I am many, countless steps ahead of you. Can you follow this thread word by word, are you paying attention each sentence? Probably not. Many of you want to cut to the chase. You want to interrupt the flow and step in whenever you please, hesitate to do so.

I lead this thread, this conversation. You follow, like two dancers, a man leading his little girl by her trembling hands. You've never danced before, and you've never followed very well. Now you dance in front of a crowd, and you follow still. You are a good follower, not a great leader. And you will follow.

If you want to lead, by all means, do so. But learn philosophy. Become Philosopher, first. Are you Philosopher?

Can you lead? Can you doubt? Can you question? Can you answer? Can you do philosophy? Can you philosophize?

Don't come here in bad faith, as Lyssa and Satyr already proved. Come in good faith, and if you desire to lead, then lead. Teach me something new. Answer every single question you have, before I do. Answer your own questions, before you ask them. Show me your seriousness, that you actually love philosophy. Show me that you are passionate about philosophy. Show me, Philosopher.

Thirsty wrote:

Æon wrote:

You do not fear what you know.  You know the sun will rise tomorrow.  If you doubted this premise, and actually disbelieved the sun will rise tomorrow, then you would change everything about your life right now.  You would prepare for death.  Because that's what's implied by the sun not rising.  The earth would stop rotating or be in another situation where the sun does not "rise" based on human perspectives.

You function, every morning, on the premise that the sun rises tomorrow.

Lyssa already dodged this question, like a coward.  Will you do the same?  How does a human only "33% believe" the sun will rise tomorrow?  Explain this.

People do not fear what they know.  However, familiarity breeds contempt.

Holy fucking Moses on a carousel...
Are you able to focus for a second and pay attention to what I've asked you?

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh......

Be still.
Calm yourself.

Listen to the sound of my voice, read the words....do not doubt them, doubt your resistance to them.

Be silent...
You will feel yourself becoming heavier.....heavier...
A slumber is coming over you.

Doubt yourself, do not doubt my words.
I come bringing salvation....
I am the messiah.

Philosophy is about hypnosis, mind tricks....do not resist.
Resist only your resistance.

We will be calling this session "philosophy".
We will be philosophizing about philosophy.

Why do you refuse my words?
Learn to have faith.

Blind faith in me.

I am your maaaaaaster....
I am goooood....like.
I neeeeeed toi be worshiped.....I neeeeed pussssy....

Let me seeeed your mind with my wooooords....
Truuust me.
What is trust....trust is faith....
Have faith about me.

Satyr, stay on topic and quit trolling.

You should delete your previous, off topic response, since it adds nothing to this thread and the OP.

Your words...they are magical.
I cannot doubt them...but only doubt my own doubting.


Lead...lead us to the promised land....
I am guessing it's between your legs.

You complain about the quality of content on ILP, but strangely, when it comes to this forum, you trash threads similar to how mr reasonable does so on ILP.

So how is this area any different, when both you and he are common trolls, who cannot stay on topic and add content to a discussion?

Go ahead and dodge this question, it's ok.

Lets not disrupt his thread.

He's about to promise unique, original wisdom nobody else can give.

He was not born for this time.
He speaks to the future.

He's Aeon.

I combine past, present, and future into one fluid aspect of time.

I discriminate based on time and perspective. Very few do.

Æon wrote:

Now, given that a pilot knows everything about his plane, a beeping noise will be familiar to him.  He will have heard it before.
He will know, as quickly as possible, the type of alarm.  

Is he alert?  Is he sober?  Is he awake and not sleep deprived?  Define the specific context.
(...)

A pilot can control fear, using knowledge as the deterrent.

(...)

I must question your basic intellectual abilities.  So far, you have not offered a good faith presentation here.

(...)

Do you know what knowledge is???  I do.  The above proves that I do.  I add context where you lack.  I demonstrate your ignorance, for you.  I compensate for your lack.

My dearest King, forgive me.

Me grandson of witches and heretics got overwhelmed by your knowledge and wisdom.
And this might be one of the reasons why I've confused a piece of software with the Operating System.


Now, let me bend over for you and use my micro-intellectual abilities to pay my duty.

Please, don't hesitate, close your eyes, and enjoy...

Disrupt the thread when you have something to contribute to the premise, what is philosophy?

Attempt to define philosophy in your own words. Own your words, become accountable for yourself.

Everybody in this thread should have a respective definition of philosophy at the ready.

Aeon wrote:

Disrupt the thread when you have something to contribute to the premise, what is philosophy?

Attempt to define philosophy in your own words. Own your words, become accountable for yourself.

Everybody in this thread should have a respective definition of philosophy at the ready.

I don't understand. Is there some kind of briliant response to that? I like precise definitions to words, going into great detail defining any one word will always end you up in the same place. That of personal experience relating to your notion of it, missing the whole point to begin with.

So Here:

Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with reality, existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. Philosophy is distinguished from other ways of addressing such problems by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on rational argument. In more casual speech, by extension, "philosophy" can refer to "the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group".
The word "philosophy" comes from the Ancient Greek φιλοσοφία (philosophia), which literally means "love of wisdom".The introduction of the terms "philosopher" and "philosophy" has been ascribed to the Greek thinker Pythagoras.

There Will Be Blood wrote:

Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with reality, existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. Philosophy is distinguished from other ways of addressing such problems by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on rational argument. In more casual speech, by extension, "philosophy" can refer to "the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group".
The word "philosophy" comes from the Ancient Greek φιλοσοφία (philosophia), which literally means "love of wisdom".The introduction of the terms "philosopher" and "philosophy" has been ascribed to the Greek thinker Pythagoras.

Now compare:

Æon wrote:

Philosophy is the search for truth, primarily using doubt. Whereas science uses hypothesis and religion uses faith, to search for truth. Doubt is the primary tool of philosophers. So what is doubt? Doubt is a form of rejection, skepticism, and distrust. A very doubtful person doesn't believe what trusted people tell him. Conspiracy theorists are good examples of cynics and skeptics. They don't believe in many institutional lies. However, they do believe that "somebody is out to get me". With great distrust, there is often an underlying fear.

In order to answer the question of what philosophy is, doubt must primarily be analyzed. Without doubt, philosophy doesn't make much sense. So it is senseless to analyze philosophy without analyzing doubt as well.

From the start, what do I see.

You say that philosophy is "study" while I say philosophy is "search".

You say "fundamental problems" and I say "truth".

Interestingly, your definition does not include doubt whereas my definition has doubt in the first sentence.


Your turn. Compare and contrast our definitions, where are they the same, where different?

I am very pleased that TWBB is the first participant in this thread, the first philosopher type. None before him really have contributed to this thread, "added" to it. That is what I'm looking for in terms of socializing, inquiring, and philosophizing. We need to have a good faith foundation to philosophy. Otherwise how can philosophy occur?

Define your terms, your foundation, your philosophy. Give it a name, your name, Philosopher.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Quote :

What is Philosophy?

Quite literally, the term "philosophy" means, "love of wisdom." In a broad sense, philosophy is an activity people undertake when they seek to understand fundamental truths about themselves, the world in which they live, and their relationships to the world and to each other. As an academic discipline philosophy is much the same. Those who study philosophy are perpetually engaged in asking, answering, and arguing for their answers to life’s most basic questions. To make such a pursuit more systematic academic philosophy is traditionally divided into major areas of study.

Here is another definition of philosophy. I will collect a few definitions and compare them with TWBB and myself. We will see if a consensus or pattern can form from actual philosophers, not imitators. Perhaps a pattern will indicate the path to the Philosopher Himself.

This thread was derailed on page 2 by Lyssa's narcissism and Satyr's encouragement of her lowly, banal behavior. Satyr is an inferior male and guide, not a leader. If he was a strong leader, who females could depend on, then Satyr would guide Lyssa on how to interact with philosophy, as a female specifically.

What was the contention? Lyssa accused me of "not doubting" some aspects of myself. This accusation reflected her guilt. Because what have I, personally, not doubted or never doubted? Does she truly care to know? Does she investigate others, as she would investigate herself? Does she investigate? The answer is no. Satyr is also guilty of lacking investigation, a mediocre, inferior philosopher type.

These two lack investigation and doubt. They should abandon themselves to more doubt, not less. They should doubt most, as much as possible. But they have hangups, interruptions, which I can overcome too easily.

Aren't you a faggot? Aren't you stupid? Aren't you inferior? Who, the fuck, cares?

What is the nature of your question and doubt? What is the nature of your inquiry?

Lyssa began with personal attacks, because she was exposed on the point about politics. To her, philosophy is politics, philosophy = politics, and she cannot think "outside" this premise. Philosophy is lost on her. This became apparent to me, and I learned it, after she refused the points about doubt.

Are there not some aspects of every person, every individual, Man, that you, He, cannot doubt? What can't you doubt about yourself? What can't you doubt about others? Can you doubt that your mommy loves you? Can you doubt that love and human connection exists? Can you doubt humanity, that you are of the hominid specie? Can you doubt that the sun will rise tomorrow?

If you can't....then what, the fuck, are you doing? What is your philosophy? Don't you see now your mental limitations? There are certain premises that you, not I are unwilling to doubt!

I have already doubted all these. Put any stupid, child question you have against me. Am I a homosexual virgin who can't get laid? Sure, why not. Who cares? Is this the direction of your doubt? Why are you focused on sexuality? Why are you focused on virginity? Why is this important to you? You attack what you believe is a weakness, do you not?

And this is the nature of pitiful, petty doubt. A mediocre philosophy, if a philosophy at all.

A waste of thought, discussion, inquiry, investigation. You could have spent your time on something important. Instead you spent this time exposing yourself to minds much higher than yours. If you're going to embarrass yourself, if you want to become a politician more than a philosopher, then at least come to these realizations in the face of your exposé.

Your blind reaching out with your arms, feeling around with your hands in the dark, is your attempt to doubt. That is something worthwhile. But it does expose the deepest, farthest reaches of your mind, that you keep hidden even from yourself.

Have I applied doubts to anybody in this thread? No, because I lead a good faith thread. I demonstrate, lead you, so that someday when you attempt to do philosophy, engage it, probably quite pathetically, then at least you will have learned from a philosophy becomer. I become Philosopher. And you? What do you become? Do you even give a shit about philosophy?

Do you love philosophy? No, not compared to some.

Here are my doubts thus far:

I doubt that any female can "do" philosophy as there is something inherent within the identity and concept of philosophy, opposed to females, that cannot merge or mesh together. Females lack courage, and do not need philosophy, while men "do" philosophy for females, on their behalf, as is true with all other "hard science" or great artistry.

I doubt Lyssa is interested in philosophy, but instead, is interested in politics and merely uses philosophy as a means to assert herself in political arenas. This is represented by her obsession and fixation on political discourse, early in the thread, near the beginning.

It's sooo tough being a man, you poor little man, you.

Let's stay on topic folks, I know it's difficult but do try your damnedest. Give philosophy your best oomph, give it some elbow grease, or best yet, give it your all.

Attempt to gauge others as philosophers, females excluded obviously.

Æon wrote:

Let's stay on topic folks, I know it's difficult but do try your damnedest.  Give philosophy your best oomph, give it some elbow grease, or best yet, give it your all.

Attempt to gauge others as philosophers, females excluded obviously.

No doubt.

Satyr wrote:

No doubt.

No, let's doubt instead.

I'm wrong, I fucked up. Women are philosophers. They search and study the unknown, courageously. They lead discussions. They inquire into nature. They are natural explorers of the unknown. Most of the settlers and colonialists throughout the world, and history, were females. For example, Christopher Columbus was not male, but actually a hidden name to the truth, Christina Columbus. And most of her crew was women, or all of them.

In fact women, almost always lead philosophical endeavors, as philosophers. It's just that evil men, steal the works and thoughts of women, and publish women's thoughts using their own names. Males are thieves. All we take, is owed to women, originally.

Doubt the premise. I am a female, with a vagina. If I have any philosophical ability, then it is owed to my feminine nature, not my masculine nature.


Your turn, can you doubt your own premises? If you cannot, then you have too much to learn about philosophy. How can philosophy occur without doubt, search, study? Without examining what should have been obvious? An obvious fact, females usually and commonly do philosophy. It's men who are lagging behind.