What is Philosophy?

I doubt the sexual designations of male/female are absolutes, and that there is not a woman out there more masculine than you...

I doubt you have a mind at par with the upper 10% of biological females, of which a couple have graced us with their presence here...

I doubt I care enough to pursue this futile attempt to gain attention with you...

I doubt your interests...

I doubt I have the energies, anymore, to play on this level...

I doubt that there is any hope for 90% of the human race...

I doubt being part of the 10%...

I doubt the emphasis placed on male/female here, compared to child/adult.

I doubt your ability to maintain objectivity and balance of perspective.

I doubt your willingness to understand how biology, genetics, connects with underlying metaphysical beliefs about gender.

I doubt more, than all.

I doubt every doubt, including my own.


The important question is, what can't you doubt? What do you doubt least of all?

Æon wrote:

I doubt the emphasis placed on male/female here, compared to child/adult.

I doubt your ability to maintain objectivity and balance of perspective.

I doubt your willingness to understand how biology, genetics, connects with underlying metaphysical beliefs about gender.

I doubt more, than all.

I doubt every doubt, including my own.


The important question is, what can't you doubt?  What do you doubt least of all?

I don't doubt that you are most certainly correct.

Ta, Ta,

Satyr is unwilling to participate, for whatever reason, so be it.

But the question stands to all readers and participants. The question is posed against Philosopher.

What do you doubt most? What do you doubt least?

God is an easy one to doubt, unicorns, fairies, magical beings not replicated and without evidence. It is easy to doubt fantastical ideas. On the other hand, can you doubt that you are human, reading english, and existing in space and time? How often do you doubt your own humanity? Do you doubt that you are a boy or girl, man or woman? Do you doubt your identity that you've spent your life thus far, building concept upon concept?

Probably not. There is a prioritization of your doubting, representing what you doubt least of all, and beginning your faith.

There are some ideas that you simply refuse to doubt, and most definitely, will lash out and attack with violence those who question such aspects of yourself.

Real metaphysics, deep philosophy, the very identity of your existence. The core of being and becoming.

How far can you doubt? Not far enough?

Someone's just sent me an email with this beautiful list.

Do you know at what level one becomes a Philosopher? I mean, a real Philosopher, not just someone who reads books.

Levels of Consciousness:

[33] -The level of Nazi concentration camps.
[120] - The level of nihilism.
[160-190] - The level of scepticism. Scepticism is a form of a (rather grandiose) negative approach and calibrates at 160, as does The Sceptic's Dictionary. It is also associated with thinly disguised animosity towards things such as a deity, religions, and Spirituality. Its main defect is that it is unable to comprehend nonlinear reality, which is the consequence of context as well as essence. Perception is a projection of bias, as noted by Descartes (res interna vs. res externa) as well as Socrates. All the sceptic's arguments (disproved by Plato, Socrates, et al. centuries ago), as well as criticism and correspondence, calibrate from 160 to 190. Alas, sceptics are unable to perform consciousness calibrations because it requires that both of the participants as well as the intention of the question calibrate over 200. (None have done so thus far.)
[245] - Consciousness of a family cat (5 more points than an average cat).
[305] -The current level of China as well as the consciousness of a chimpanzee. This is also the calibration of being ethical and fair.
[385] - The calibration of wisdom.
[465] -The level of Rousseau, Sophocles, and Shakespeare. 
[470] - The level of Descartes. 
[485] - The level of Plato, Francis Bacon, Galileo, and Hippocrates.
[499] - The level of modern Judaism. It is also the level of intellectual geniuses. Sigmund Freud was at this level, as opposed to Carl Jung who was above the second critical shift which occurs at 500, as will be evident later. Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton were at this level as well. 
[505] - The level of valor. Also the level of Dante.
[535] -The energy level of Christmas, which is probably due to the common practice of giving gifts to others and having festive celebrations with good tidings.
[560] -Carl Jung was at this level. Sigmund Freud was below the level of 500 because of his denial of man’s spirituality, whereas Jung affirmed the spiritual nature of human beings. 
[575] - The level consciousness of ecstasy. 
[610] -The level of Lao Tzu and his teachings.
[640] - The king James version of the New Testament. 
[700] -The level of the phrase Om Mane Padme Hum
[705] -The level of the Rig Veda 
[700+] - There are 22 sages on this planet who calibrate at this level or higher, according to Dr. Hawkins. Of those, 20 of them are at 800 or more, of whom there are 10 at or over 900, and one sage at 990. 
[780] -The Heart Sutra and the Lotus Sutra.
[795] -Bodhidharma as well as the Zen teachings.
[840] -The Self is seen as Beyond Existence or Nonexistence.
[965] -Transcending the Levels of Consciousness, by David R. Hawkins
[1000] - This is the maximum energy level that can be tolerated by the human body and nervous system. It is the extremely rare level of avatars from ages past. No human has ever existed with a consciousness calibration higher than 1000. The archetypes Christ, Buddha, and Krishna are at this level. This state is also the existence of Buddhahood, Christ Consciousness, At-Oneness with the Source Manifest and Unmanifest. 
[1000+] -Buddhahood, Brahman, Christ, Krishna, The ‘I’ of Ultimate Reality.
[1250] - ‘I’ of Essence of Divine Creation. 
[50,000] - The level of what in times past have been called archangels but more recently have come to be known as the Elders, or the Ancient Ones via between life regressions.
Infinity - The Source of reality manifest as divinity. The supreme creation Source of consciousness eternal. The Source of all that is.

Thirsty wrote:

this beautiful list.

How exactly have any of these philosophical thinkers, outside of classical western thinkers, created any doubts, questions, or ideologies of worth?

I'd like a summation of some basic ideas produced and pushed forward from these supposed philosophers.


For example Descartes is famous for "I think therefore I am", and essentially taking human doubt, therefore human reasoning, as far as any other thinkers had done in centuries.

This should be a simple assignment.

Will somebody pick this boy up, lay him across their lap, and give him a thorough smacking?

Stay on topic phony.

Dig deeper into thyself, what are you, who are you, when and where is your ultimate, absolute origin? How far into the past does your blood draw from? Is your spirit or soul 20 years old? 200? 2000? 200000000000000000000000? Some erroneously call me an absolutist. This is false. It is more that I transcend and destroy all limits, especially my contemporaries. When I venture outside of their limits, these ones accuse me of absolutism, as if I have ever forgotten degree. False, patently wrong. I never forget degree. I look inward as well as outward. I travel in both directions. I sprint backward and forward, also side to side. I sprint upward into the sky and downward through the ground. Their limits do not apply to me. I walk through every idea.

Seriously, how far can you go before you turn back? How far into the void? Into nihilism? Into disbelief? Into doubt?

Do you descend farther than I already have? Have you seen the impossible depths, within yourself?


I have failed....to push you. I need to provoke you. I need to light a fire within you. I need to compel you to look deeper. Because you do not have the need within yourself. You have the curiosity, yes. But you do not have the courage. You are filled with fear and cowardice. I will push you over the edge, and stomp you deeper into the void. I will accelerate your fall and descent into madness. I will place you into the darkest catacombs, lightless places, mazes, and abandon you there. You should lose yourself.

You should begin, just once, to do philosophy.

I have failed in my lifetime. There are no philosophers during my life. Nietzsche was the last, most recent philosopher to live. But none live now. So I must speak to the future, beyond myself. I must speak to the next philosopher born. I hope you are born soon. I hope you are born now. But I probably will miss you.

Instead, my life will become consumed by poking, prodding, and provoking people through philosophy I deem mediocre and childish.

Nobody is at my level, my height.

Satyr is close to me, under me, but I have no inclination to lift him higher anymore. I need a stronger spirit to associate with. I need one with even more potential, than all.

I need Philosopher, to find you, lift you up, and then finally lift You higher than myself. Where I have failed in life, you will succeed.


Dig Deepest.

Æon wrote:

Dig Deepest.

What is Philosophy for?

What is Knowledge for?

Not what, but who. Philosophy is for people, a rare type of person.

Knowledge is genetic, DNA strands, and also represents the brain and central nervous system, memories.

Memories are abstractions of genes.

Æon wrote:

Not what, but who.  Philosophy is for people, a rare type of person.

Fine. But what is that philosophy for, for those rare people?

Quote :

Knowledge is genetic, DNA strands, and also represents the brain and central nervous system, memories.

Memories are abstractions of genes.

What is all this knowledge for?

Lyssa wrote:

Fine. But what is that philosophy for, for those rare people?

An identification of a concept:
Philosophy represents the most powerful curiosity and therefore, the most powerful explorer.
A rare mind representing a genius, Genus, compelled to penetrate all unknowns.
The philosopher is the man whom fucks the unknown and invades a new area, a new territory.
A mental territory, it doesn't need to be physical, although it can be physical as well.

Christopher Columbus must have had philosopher blood in him.
Neil Armstrong must have had philosopher blood in him.
Because these men had the drive, the nobility, to enter into absolutely new areas, to humanity.

Philosophy tends to be more mental, ideological, and conceptual. Ideological unknowns, instead of physical unknowns. Areas beyond human knowledge. To trespass into what humanity does not know, you must first identify what humanity does know. And what does humanity know? Do Christians know God? Do you know the Earth revolves around the Sun? Do you know that you'll wake up tomorrow? What if you die, tonight? Where is your certainty, do you truly know one step to the next?

Can you say for certain, that you will live one week from now??? If not, then you are uncertain, and you do not have knowledge, but instead, a belief, a religious faith. You religious believe that you will live and wake up tomorrow. This is your faith. You were convinced of this religious belief, early on in life.

You have yet to doubt, as I already do. If you wish to know the mind of a philosopher, then know the difference between to know, and to know not. You do not know. You know nothing. You do not know what will happen tomorrow. You do not know what will happen today. You do not know that if you fall off a cliff, that you will fall "down" instead of up. You. Know. Nothing!

This is the beginning of proper philosophy. All doubt. Doubt all. There is no premise that Philosopher cannot doubt! All premises are undone. All is false. We begin from nothing, and work toward something. We build a truth. We imagine a premise, a hypothesis. And we prove it, one statement and belief at a time.

We build. We construct. We start as far away from Truth as possible. Philosophers are farthest away from Truth. Religious people are closest to Truth. Religious people are inside, looking out. Philosophers are outside, looking in.

Lyssa wrote:

What is all this knowledge for?

For me. For Philosopher. Maybe for you. For those philosophers who acquire wisdom, not knowledge, but wisdom. Wisdom is the rarest thing.

Wisdom should help any philosopher achieve his goals. Wisdom may achieve anything imaginable. Any goal ought to look miniscule, childish, and ridiculous after seen from the state of highest wisdom.

Who, cares, if you....create a new iphone and make a billion dollars? Who gives a fuck? What is one human goal worth having? Inventing airplanes and flying, is this some great feat of humanity? Who cares? What is meaningful, most important of all? You have a family and a few children, so the fuck, what?

Try to think of one thing, just one ideal, worth having, and worth fulfilling. Imagine outside the limits of humanity. Wisdom can achieve it. Nothing is impossible to the wise.

Æon wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

Fine. But what is that philosophy for, for those rare people?

And what does humanity know?  Do Christians know God?  Do you know the Earth revolves around the Sun?  Do you know that you'll wake up tomorrow?  What if you die, tonight?  Where is your certainty, do you truly know one step to the next?

Can you say for certain, that you will live one week from now???  If not, then you are uncertain, and you do not have knowledge, but instead, a belief, a religious faith.

This is why I already said at the very start; reason is of two kinds.

One kind is awareness, and the other kind which you speak about - which needs "certainty" is the one asking for Faith.

But nevermind that for the moment,, let me leave that aside for the moment and ask you,

What is this certainty for?

What does Knowledge do for you?

You should already know the answer by now.

If you actually doubt, for the first time, that you will still be alive tomorrow. If you believe that your life is coming to an end, tomorrow. Then this changes your whole perspective, world, reality. It changes everything, if you actually believe the proposition.

If you actually doubt what you already presume with relative certainty. So what do average people, humanity, truly "know". Know is a higher degree of belief. Certainty. People are "certain" of gravity. Certain of immutable, natural laws.

But does gravity exist in space, when you are floating without its pull? Are you certain, then?


Doubt destroys all belief, all premise. All hypotheses are destroyed, deconstructed, investigated. Every single belief, every single thought you've ever had.

Where is your certainty? Your compass? Your core? Your identity? What aspect of yourself is truly unique and individual? What part of you cannot become repeated?

Your certainty, your belief, your faith, exposes you for what you truly are. There are some ideas inside your brain, that you refuse to let go of.

And philosophers learn to see, recognize, and identify these types of ideas.

Æon wrote:

Doubt destroys all belief, all premise.  All hypotheses are destroyed, deconstructed, investigated.  Every single belief, every single thought you've ever had.

And the results of those investigations after doubting and keeping on doubting, what do they give you?
What does knowledge give you?

Do they perhaps give you power?

Do they perhaps give you an advantage to better manage the world, and your life?

Lyssa wrote:

And the results of those investigations after doubting and keeping on doubting, what do they give you?
What does knowledge give you?

What is knowledge except your most certain, most closely guarded life secrets?

Lyssa wrote:

Do they perhaps give you power?

Do they perhaps give you an advantage to better manage the world, and your life?

Absolutely

Æon wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

And the results of those investigations after doubting and keeping on doubting, what do they give you?
What does knowledge give you?

What is knowledge except your most certain, most closely guarded life secrets?

Lyssa wrote:

Do they perhaps give you power?

Do they perhaps give you an advantage to better manage the world, and your life?

Absolutely

So you have admitted that knowledge has to do with life-enhancing power and self-advantage.

This is exactly what a cell is, the most basic building block of life. Efficient organization geared for self-assertion is the realm of politics.
A human is an extension of such a cellular organization. Philosophy is an extension of such life-politics.

By your own admission, I hope you can see the relation now.

No, because you want politics to precede philosophy, does not make it so.

Philosophy is also inherent within biology as an organism is separated between self and other. What is other, is unknown. And the otherness is explored. Organisms do this early in cognitive development, and without realizing otherness, cannot understand self as well.

Like how some animals recognize themselves in mirrors, and others do not.

Your political bias is far too obvious. It tickles me humorously to watch you desperately and vainly attempt to validate your own subjective bias and prejudice, under the guise of objectivity and philosophy.

Typical female.

Philosophy is the self-correction by consciousness of its own initial excess of subjectivity.

Consciousness grows in every organic creature in almost the same way or fashion.

Consciousness precedes self consciousness. The subject looks outward, and therefore explores outward. The first stage of cognitive development is the identification of otherness and objects. The young animal identifies otherness. Instincts primarily dictate this phase. Friends and enemies are distinguished by specie. The organism does not yet realize "what" it is. It is an animal that is unaware of self.

Imagine a young creature, or a human infant, living without a mirror. If it sees its image in a mirror, will not yet recognize itself. The brain does not recognize itself, but instead, receives all sensual data as "otherness".

In the early stages of cognitive human development, "discrimination" occurs by identifying this otherness. For example, a baby sucks on its own thumb or toes. It licks itself, as a cat does. What does this action do? It creates a feedback. The human infant can "feel itself" by licking and tasting itself. But when it licks food, or eats food, or drinks milk, there is no feedback. Because the other object, the food source, is not integrated within its own body.

This is one of the primary steps of cognitive development, the dualism between otherness and selfhood. Also the difference between subject and object, or real and ideal, or noumenon and phenomenon.

Noumenous data is integral "within" the human body, or any other organism. It is a feedback loop of data.

You feel your left arm with your right hand. You experience both the feeling of "touching", but also, "being touched", at the "same time". Whereas if you feel a brick wall, then your mind differentiates this as not "being touched".

You learn to touch, but not "be touched". This is one of the primary cognitive divisions. Dualism. Separation of self and other.

The feedback loop is broken. I touch the brick wall, but do not "feel touched". As opposed to when I touch my left arm with my right hand. Then I am both "touching and being touched", within the same mental network.

Many, or most lowly developed animals and species, can only go "so far" in their cognitive development. Some "low bred" organisms, on the "low end" of the foodchain and hierarchy of organic power, will never "bridge the gap" of self consciousness.

For example, many organisms cannot identify "themselves" in a mirror. But treat their own reflections as a threat or enemy.


This separation of 'inner' and 'outer' world, the subject-object dualism, is one of the primary forces of philosophy as well.

What is one of the core ingredients of philosophy? I already gave this answer in the thread. Exploration.

The "higher" exploration is represented in "higher" organisms, and, cognition. More "otherness" is explored. The philosopher is distinct within His exploration of the world, because He explores all the "outside" and all the "inside".

Not only must The Philosopher "know Himself", but He must also "know all else" as well. Self and Other. Know All.

Or in the case of doubt, unknow all and unlearn all. Unlearn all prejudice, bias, and dogma. Learn the difference between what you thought you knew, what can become known, and what cannot become known.

These later differences, of knowledge, is the specialized philosophical area called "Epistemology".

There are types of knowledge. And this is a fundamental part of acquiring The Philosopher title.

You would imagine, mistakingly, that with the advent of the internet and global communication across all culture and boundaries, that a group of individuals would rise up with philosophy in mind, for the implicit purpose to challenge one another in their most deeply embedded beliefs and ideas. But what is the reality? The reality is a forum like ILP, where challenging is not actually wanted at all, but instead explicitly discouraged. A dogma is reinforced, representing an underlying, civilizing force. Humanism, christianity, secularism, judaism, egalitarianism.

Just as heretics once challenged the european catholic church, now today heretics fall under a new name, politically incorrect, as well as the catholic church, the state and government.

Words change, but does time change? The answer is no, because the true players are few. Few, or none, or but one, or two, take up this struggle and fight to learn in life. You are living, but, refusing to learn. Why? What holds you back? See ILP. What holds these maggots back? Nothing. Instead you should not think of it as a "holding back" but instead, the lack of a "pushing forward". A complete lack of motivation.

Whatever it is that causes The Philosopher to push forward, to learn the universe and life, is absent in the rest of the human farm. Maggots do not have a philosophy. They do not have that inner drive that marks The Philosopher and makes Him different. And it is absent even among the rare who struggle to higher heights.

Because distribution of power is not equal in nature, nor is the distribution of skill, ability, and potential.

Not all animals have the capacity to think. Are plants and vegetables cognizant? Are fish? Birds? Frogs?

Define thought. Define your own cognition, if you dare. And you do not dare, at least, not in a forum of your superiors and your peers. You dare not expose yourself to a mind that has already delved inside of yours. Because there is your fear.

The average human, the manimal, fears his and her own fear. It is the "red pill" affect, to wake up, out of society while living within society, to a world of fear. It is the fear these slaves have always felt, but never had the knowledge, nor the courage, to put a name to.

These maggots do not want to be waken up. But there may exist a few among them, sleepers, with the most ancient bloodline. And it is within these rarest of all souls, who inherit the blood of The Philosopher.

These are individuals worth seeking and speaking. None else.

The commoner is a slave, a manimal if you will.

She is a fool. She doesn't know much about existence, life, or the universe, nor does she want to. She does not have a strong desire nor yearning to explore the universe. She is a coward. And she will never venture beyond the city walls. She is female, even if she has a penis. The commoner whether "man" or woman, is a coward manimal. The foolishness of the manimal occurs frequently when the commoner interacts with the uncommon, the nobility of society. The nobility is marked not by class or caste, as I claim, but by distinction of ideology and philosophy. The Philosopher, You, are truly uncommon and rare. You understand all the levels of ignorance running rampant throughout society.

Society is not built on truth, but on lies. Common lies for commoners. Ideologies, religions, faith, dogmas all exist for the commoner. Ready made thoughts.

Pre-thoughts. Let this become our new concept. The commoners, the manimals, have "pre-thoughts" like pre-digested food. A mother spoon feeding her infant. Pre-thoughts dominate civilization, throughout the world. From a young age, the vast majority populations around the world imbibe these pre-thoughts without doubt. They take their dogmas on faith. They don't "think" about them. Because to think is to doubt. Thought and doubt coincide with each other.

What kind of mindset does it take to accept what all other people on blind faith? This is the problem of lying and truth throughout society. Lying evolves, but, there is no counter balance of "truth". And by truth, I mean, philosophical truth. The Philosopher exists to explore reality, the universe, objectivity, the void, the great unknowns. The Philosopher asks the "biggest" questions, but, also the smallest.

The coward, the commoners, ask very few questions. Because they fear their ignorance becoming known and too obvious. The manimals are afraid of their ignorance, and how easy it is for them to become exposed by higher, more intelligent minds. Sharper minds cut apart the dullness of the commoner. Common ideologies for commoners. Their philosophies reflect this fact.

It is too easy for The Philosopher to humiliate these commoners, slaves, and fools. These manimals. These manimals are viscerally aware of human ignorance, but, too scared and cowardly to confront it. The Philosopher, however, must accept ignorance as fact. The Philosopher embraces ignorance.

"I know that I know nothing." I am aware of my ignorance. I am aware the limitations of a biological brain, cognitive system. I am aware that I do not have more than two eyes and can only look in one direction at a time forward. I do not have eyes in the back of my head, or to the left and right, or above. My senses are limited. My feelings are limited. My intellect is limited. My imagination is limited. Albeit I want to expand all of these as far as I can, to push my limits and the limits of my allies and accomplices. My Philosopher Peers. My compatriots in intellectual arms.

Mortality is the ultimate limit. I cannot see beyond my death. Death represents all unknowns, what cannot become known. Death is an impossibility in this fashion.

What does the commoner, faggot, manimal, maggot.....do???

She believes in the afterlife. She clings to it. Because she cannot accept fate. She cannot accept limitations. She cannot remove herself from the realm of ideals, imagination, and fantasy. This is why no female philosophers ever existed, nor ever will. Because females are protected from death. Females flock to popular religion, explicitly due to this "what happens when I die" question. Females are too scared of death, and will ignore it completely, rather than confront it.

Because of the fear associated with ignorance, of the commoner and her common mind...she is too easy for The Philosopher to humiliate. She is an easy target, in fact, the easiest target. She doesn't say much, ever, for this reason. She does not go "in depth" with "her own voice" on any topics. Because she readily contradicts herself and demonstrates her lack of direction when it comes to navigating even simple concepts, let alone the most complex ideologies. She is lost, with her intellect.

Females are closest to nature, instinct, automated pre-thoughts and reflexes. Feelings. No reason. All emotion, no reason. Remember this stupid bitch? She's gone, didn't last too long around here, why? The answer is too obvious. Females are not cut out for exploration of reality, let alone a confrontation and challenging of basic ignorance.

A female does her best to imitate, and she maintains some success, at least for a little while. Before she ultimately gives up. Philosophy is too challenging for her, requires a completely different nature than she has inherited.


I was once asked why philosophers tend to not to marry. Do philosophers, males, tend to sexually reproduce and spread their genes, or not? I don't know. It maybe because The Philosopher has no woman to put himself into. Maybe The Philosopher has no need to sexually reproduce. This would at least immediately explain the uniqueness and individuality of The Philosopher type, and why no two philosophers are ever "completely" alike. There is always a difference. And that difference expresses the perspective of a highest type of existence.

An explorer of all unknowns. A challenger of ignorance. An abundant awareness of limitations. An overflow of wisdom. A foresight of the wall of mortality and death.


I pursue The Philosopher. I want that title and status. Because I seek The Truth, not some petty religion or faith or dogma. I accept nothing at face value. Expound upon your reasons for belief. Demonstrate the causes of your science. Prove yourself! Know thyself and prove thyself! Live your Philosophy.

The commoner is a fool in his fear of his own ignorance.
The commoner is a fool twice in his cowardice before the great unknown of existence.

The commoner hates her own ignorance, and so hates the one who exposes this to herself, she blames The Philosopher.
The commoner views The Philosopher as bad, hurtful, mean, cruel, even evil. Even as Satan.
Because the commoner becomes exposed.

You are not an explorer of the universe, but instead herald your inherited faith and dogma, popularly this is secular humanism.
You are not appreciative of ignorance, nor can you handle it, but instead fear ignorance. And so ignorance debilitates the common mind.

Philosophy freezes the common mind in fear.
This causes the "absolution" effect, reaction, where the commoner posits absolute postulations as a response to new information.

We see this every week on KT forum, from the fear of the ILP fools who at least have the courage to come here, even if they are not here to learn.
At least their presence signifies a cut above the rest of ILP. This courage is worth something at least, and redeeming in my opinion.

From the female perspective, The Philosopher and His mind appears chaotic.

Because He orders at a level far, far, far beyond the commoner. He seems to exist on another plane altogether. The reality is that he navigates both within and outside of civilization. Because The Philosopher commonly, routinely trespasses into the unknown, where females are "disallowed" to ever go. This appeals to females. It is the "bad boy" factor of the young male who takes obscene risks, often, and all the cute blue eyed blondies flock to him. Alpha personality. But what seem like "risks" to others, is not a risk to this top dog. He simply has more courage and confidence gained by his natural ability. He doesn't take stupid risks, but, managed risks.

Same for The Philosopher, except His risk taking is mostly unseen and also unappreciated. The Philosopher takes great risks, but outside the populace and popular democracy. The Philosopher finds a new home outside civilization and society. Because here his male nature, His Masculinity, can stretch and grow. To its fullest potential. A sprawling ideology that can push itself to its limits, only limited by accessible energy, or possibilities.

Within civilization and society there is "Hate Speech" and anti free speech.

The same reason most of us congregate here now, banned from ILP multiple times. These are the types who wish to censor and curtail philospohy. Anti Philosophers, haters of wisdom, learning, understanding, intellect, risk taking. Haters of argument, discourse, exposure. Haters of growth. While ironically they present themselves as "progressive".

But what do the city walls of civilization do? They prevent growth. Limited room, limited space. The Philosopher cannot stretch his mind, ideals, and possibilities out.

Outside society, outside what is "acceptable discourse", outside the status quo, The Philosopher can grow. But now His limitation changes.

He has plenty of space, but now must collect his own energy. Civilization is abundant with energy, but limited on room. The Wild is abundant with room, but limited on energy. So The Philosopher must cultivate the wild, unexplored areas. Cultivation eventually results in a new civilization.

And the cycle repeats, Eternal Recurrence.

"What is He going to say next?
What is He going to do next?"

The little twat thinks to herself, as she watches her alpha male, her inspiration, jump off the highest cliff into a pool of water. Or she watches him drive his car the fastest, cornering the sharpest, in an after school race competition. And he does it all without thinking twice, no hesitation! He's not full of doubt, but does it all effortlessly!

She wonders and watches in amazement, her pussy getting moister and moister.

Because mindset, to take a risk, is just completely foreign to her own.

Males are the expendable gender, yes it's true....
And so females are the privileged gender, yes it's also true.

It's not even the fact that all females, all twats, are "stupid" per se.......... That's not it. It doesn't do the female specie justice.

It's mostly that the female specie is the most cowardly entity of the two genders. Why does she always hint, insinuate, innuendo, hint, suggest, but never claim, hold opinion, and have thoughts of her own? Because to hold an opinion is a risk. And it is a risk the female specie does not take, perhaps "wisely" or "intelligently" so. But random guesses are one thing. What is the most probable scenario?

It is the observation of the common woman's cowardice. She dares not speak of things she doesn't know, and thus, will always maintain security and safety in the realm of the superficially social.

A dumb hen and a brown cow will chatter away all day long in the sheeple barn, talking about simple nothings and trifles. Do the gurlz ever trespass onto more "serious" topics? No, of course not. Is this natural? Probably. But ask yourself a simple question......when have you ever, ever, ever heard of a woman taking a strong stand on any position?

I recall Karen Straugh of the MRA, MGTOW movements, but look at her. She looks a little butch, yes? She has admitted self interests, her son. She has backers, stardusk, sandman, barbarossa, etc. She has defenders, a host of men at her ready in case she makes a rhetorical mistake, which she will, in due time.

Maybe this is an example of "female intelligence", but female philosophy???

Still waiting...........forever. Never going to happen. Never to find a woman with a mind worthy of male respect. Because as Lyssa proves daily, a "female philosopher" is a copy paster. Never her own ideas, never her own individuality, never her own voice, never her own courage.

Because females are the coward specie, the coward half of humanity. Even the most cowardly male, the least trustworthy, has more courage than the bravest woman.

A female never holds a strong opinion until she chooses her thinker, her philosopher, her hero, who first destroys all contrary doubts and positions.

It's not until the Sun revolves around the Earth is popular enough, and everybody believes it, that she too, the dumb twat, will finally hold the same opinion. Until a female can be 100% certain of a position, will she begin to speak it, repeat it, and claim it "as her own" and integrate a philosophical ideal within her mind.

She needs popular support first. The females specie does not hold the position or agreement with minority groups. A female always, always holds majority support first, among a host of males who can sufficiently defend her, before she miraculously "found the courage" for the "individuality" behind her voice.

This is another dominant reason why never was, is not now, never will become....the mystical "female philosopher".

Females simply do not take such risks, as a gender, as a biological, neurological, specie.


















This is also why females are inferior politicians and arrive much later in social history, only after all opposition has already been checked, relegated, and done away with.....

Like how Obama became the first black president, and Hilary Clinton probably will become the first (white) woman president......

Notice how there would never be a chance for a black woman president before Hilary. Why not? I already addressed all the reasons in this thread.....

The philosopher is an abundance that takes his abundance even further with celibacy.

perpetualburn wrote:

The philosopher is an abundance that takes his abundance even further with celibacy.

There is something about the practice of philosophy, deep thought, and intelligence, that is just divorced from femininity.

Females are focused on the superficial, the mundane, the popular. Females seem to detest the very idea of "seriousness" and "problems" in the "real world".

"Girls just wanna have fun."

Neon wrote:

Still waiting...........forever.  Never going to happen.  Never to find a woman with a mind worthy of male respect.  Because as Lyssa proves daily, a "female philosopher" is a copy paster.  Never her own ideas, never her own individuality, never her own voice, never her own courage.

That's because I'm not a dumb lying f---wit like you Neon.

Doing Philosophy begins with the Courage to assimilate the vast ocean that has gone behind you; and you cannot master what you have not overcome yet.

Those like you have no proper discipline and Fear hard-work, and rather indulge in the "sound of your own voice" as it is more easy and therefore pleasant, calling your mememmeme as your "originality" and speaking your own mind.

The only cowardly twat here is You.