Except that is a gross misuse of the word hedonism, anfang, very common on this forum and elsewhere. Do keep in mind that the objective of hedonism is eudaimonia. Hedonism != decadence.
Hedonism is an ideal; e.g. an animal can't be hedonistic. Let that sink in.
The critical element of hedonism is not pleasures - no matter how animalistic they may be and also no matter how sophisticated and far sighted they may be - No, it's that it was made into an ideal. That ideal being pleasure in itself (or use the word happiness, well being, good spirited(eudaimonia for the sophisti-catty). It's a corrupting force.
So your opinion is that a life in pursuit of eudaimonia is one under a corrupting force, as opposed to a life in pursuit of... ?
A hedonist is a loser who wants to trick his brain into thinking that he is actually winning. Like a patient who's treating the symptoms rather than the cause of his ailment. The goal is to replace the signals that are telling you that something is wrong with you (these signals are called pain) with signals that are telling you that all is fine (these signals are called pleasure) without actually addressing the underlying problem. A quick-fix solution rather than proper lasting solution, that's what hedonism is.
Normal people do not focus on feelings, they focus on mechanics (if they focus on feelings it is only with the aim to extract the underlying mechanics.) Once it becomes too difficult to focus on mechanics, one starts focusing on feelings instead, and that's when hedonism kicks in.
Do you really think that a hedonist, that is to say, someone who's forced to deny/falsify/misinterpret reality, is capable of understanding anything of what I'm saying here, which is to see the reality of their own condition?
Do you really think that you can quote Charlie Sheen saying what a fuck-up he is?
I can tell you that a cow is nothing but a stupid lazy horse that stands on the same spot eating grass all day... then you may consider that my interpretation is incorrect and ask me to quote a cow expert stating those things are facts... though you would probably consider the fact that someone who studies cows might have a bias in favor of them, you'd probably be inclined to take their word over mine. No?
What she's telling you Magnus, is that, your lack of formal higher education trumps anything you say on matters relating to subjects that surpass human understanding and rational discourse, subjects that only erudite references or faith, can satisfactorily explain, at least for her.
Your own logical thoughts and insights don't count Magnus. She needs academic sponsorship. She needs support from minds greater than her own because she fears that your mind might be just that. She needs Wikipedia, the dictionary, the thesaurus, "Nietzsche in 90 minutes"... shit like that. She needs authorities on the matter, second opinions, etc, that are NOT YOU because god forbid you might be an authority. You are unworthy, not qualified. You have no right to assert a surety of oneself, because she can't.
Get a degree Magnus. Get trained. Forget about free thinking.
What I am telling him is that it is preferable to have read a book on the subject before talking about it, than to just pull things out of any old stinky hole.
The reason for that is that hedonism actually has a definition. It's not an observable phenomena, it is a theory. Someone or someones wrote down a bunch of stuff and called it "hedonism". If you want to write down a bunch of stuff that is different than the first one, you'll have to call it something else.
Last edited by phoneutria on Fri Oct 03, 2014 6:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
A hedonist is a loser who wants to trick his brain into thinking that he is actually winning. Like a patient who's treating the symptoms rather than the cause of his ailment. The goal is to replace the signals that are telling you that something is wrong with you (these signals are called pain) with signals that are telling you that all is fine (these signals are called pleasure) without actually addressing the underlying problem. A quick-fix solution rather than proper lasting solution, that's what hedonism is.
Normal people do not focus on feelings, they focus on mechanics (if they focus on feelings it is only with the aim to extract the underlying mechanics.) Once it becomes too difficult to focus on mechanics, one starts focusing on feelings instead, and that's when hedonism kicks in.
It's like a person who wants to be sick, or consoles herself when she is sick, that receiving morphine in the hospital is the essence, meaning, or purpose of life.
What the hedonist misses, is that morphine is the drip you receive while two steps from death.
Hedonists cannot differentiate health from pleasure.
Last edited by Æon on Fri Oct 03, 2014 6:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
What I am telling him is that it is preferable to have read a book on the subject before talking about it, than to just pull things out of any old stinky hole.
The reason for that is that hedonism actually has a definition. It's not an observable phenomena, it is a theory. Someone or someones wrote down a bunch of stuff and called it "hedonism". If you want to write down a bunch of stuff that is different than the first one, you'll have to call it something else.
Stop before you embarrass yourself further. Since you look like my sister, you're also embarrassing me with your stupidity, by proxy.
By the way, this is not an ad homimen. I am flat out inviting anyone in this thread to provide an accurate definition of hedonism as theorized in antiquity and subsequently, and then once the definition is understood, to bring forth your objections to it.
What I am telling him is that it is preferable to have read a book on the subject before talking about it, than to just pull things out of any old stinky hole.
The reason for that is that hedonism actually has a definition. It's not an observable phenomena, it is a theory. Someone or someones wrote down a bunch of stuff and called it "hedonism". If you want to write down a bunch of stuff that is different than the first one, you'll have to call it something else.
Stop before you embarrass yourself further. Since you look like my sister, you're also embarrassing me with your stupidity, by proxy.
Aeon, it is the second time you've said I look like your sister, and still you ask me if I'd fuck you. Is incest habitual in your neck of the woods? More importantly do you realize that when I look at your name I picture someone with a huge dunce hat on?
perpetualburn
Gender : Posts : 955 Join date : 2013-01-04 Location : MA
By the way, this is not an ad homimen. I am flat out inviting anyone in this thread to provide an accurate definition of hedonism as theorized in antiquity and subsequently, and then once the definition is understood, to bring forth your objections to it.
Do your own leg-work?
_________________ And here we always meet, at the station of our heart / Looking at each other as if we were in a dream /Seeing for the first time different eyes so supreme / That bright flames burst into vision, keeping us apart.
Someone or someones wrote down a bunch of stuff and called it "hedonism". If you want to write down a bunch of stuff that is different than the first one, you'll have to call it something else.
You aren't really into philosophy, aren't you? Philosophy is merely a means to you. What you really want is A SHOWER OF COMPLIMENTS, someone telling you that they will gladly pound you real hard all night long until their cock finally falls off -- implicitly or explicitly, it does not matter. Now I fully expect you to deny this -- it's not like you're going to suddenly give up on your vain goals -- but I'm fine with that: a little bit of quarrel can be quite stimulating sexually, right?
I will, nonetheless, respond to your assertions in a serious manner because I like correcting dumb assertions.
SO LET'S GET TO THE POINT AND EXPLAIN HOW FUCKING DUMB YOU ARE.
The way I understand hedonism is different from the way hedonists understand hedonism -- that's true. This, however, does not mean that we are talking about TWO DIFFERENT types of hedonism, as your petit little brain suggests. It merely means that we are INTERPRETING the same phenomenon in two different ways. For example, Charlie Sheen sees himself as a WINNER whereas I see him as a LOSER. According to your utterly retarded logic, this means that we are talking about TWO ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CHARLIE SHEENS LOL. That's your mistake numero uno.
Your mistake numero due: in reality, all interpretations are correct. There are no "mutually exclusive" interpretations -- these merely exist in logic. However, some interpretations are "more correct" in a sense that they are more useful. For example, Charlie Sheen is both a winner and a loser: he is a winner IN HIS OWN FANTASY LAND EXISTING ONLY INSIDE HIS DERANGED BRAIN, whereas he's a loser IN REALITY I.E. OUTSIDE OF HIS DERANGED BRAIN. Get it? Similarly, hedonists ARE CORRECT, however, they must be CAREFULLY interpreted, since they lack insight into their own condition (and thus, what they often say, appears to contradict common sense.)
As someone once said, the genius does not lie in proving everyone wrong but in proving everyone right.
Aeon, it is the second time you've said I look like your sister, and still you ask me if I'd fuck you. Is incest habitual in your neck of the woods?
It's a moot point because you are probably like a second-removed cousin or so, genetically. So we can still fuck without severe cultural repercussions.
phoneutria wrote:
More importantly do you realize that when I look at your name I picture someone with a huge dunce hat on?
Do you realize that your opinion, mind, and voice carry no weight or respect around here?
But alas, I want to help you out, due to the aforementioned reason. When I see you write stupid shit, I feel the urge to step in due to self preservation. Your logical errors reflect worse on me than yourself.
You seem like the type of girl who needs her hand held through even the simplest types of philosophy and reasoning.
So I can come on here and say that nietzsche's philosophy is about stomping on kittens, and everybody has to humor me because that's MY interpretation of it, and not just tell me to go read a fucking book and come back when I am less likely to make a fool of myself? My, what a nice forum we have
So I can come on here and say that nietzsche's philosophy is about stomping on kittens, and everybody has to humor me because that's MY interpretation of it, and not just tell me to go read a fucking book and come back when I am less likely to make a fool of myself? My, what a nice forum we have
No, it means that nobody would care about your misinterpretation, because individuals here generally defend themselves and not their ideological heroes.
You essentially just argued that discussing heresay is more important than discussing ideas. Who cares about kitty stomping? Nobody.
There are several things to look at in a post and response, logic, reason, meaning, purpose. And so what is the purpose in writing what you just wrote, and to whom? You're attempting to justify your vanity. Your rationalization, your mind, as a female specifically, depends on "experts, facts, science, authority". You are a typical, predictable brain. You reject new information unless it comes through the "socially approved channels".
To your brain, facts, truth, and information are all false unless they are spoken by a popular representative, like the president. If a peasant or some obscure person says the same thing, then your brain rejects it. You only accept information from the popular (socially approved) source.
Typical female.
I've never seen an exceptional female. Females all, every single one of you, think the exact same way. Popularity and consensus, is "truth" to you. If something is unpopular then it's automatically wrong, bad, evil, negative, etc.
This is also why philosophy is totally devoid of "female thinkers". Philosophy includes new ideas. And new ideas are, by definition, adverse to the status quo. The status quo automatically rejects new ideas in favor for "modern ones". And modern ideas are actually old ideas, under new labels. Like "humanity" = "christianity". Newspeak. Old ideas disguised and reinterpreted as new.
When I say "new idea" I mean radical idea, an idea you've never heard of before. And not only that, but ideas that most the world has never heard before. Or nobody has ever heard before.
So I can come on here and say that nietzsche's philosophy is about stomping on kittens, and everybody has to humor me because that's MY interpretation of it, and not just tell me to go read a fucking book and come back when I am less likely to make a fool of myself? My, what a nice forum we have
You're too stupid to understand that my interpretation of hedonism is the best interpretation of hedonism -- there is nothing incorrect about it. If you want to argue otherwise, you will have to EXPLAIN to me what's so incorrect about it, rather than telling me to grab a book on hedonism (you can do that AT THE END of your post, AFTER you have explained why I'm wrong.) As it is, you are lazy, rude and stupid all at once.
Anfang
Gender : Posts : 3989 Join date : 2013-01-23 Age : 40 Location : Castra Alpine Grug
So your opinion is that a life in pursuit of eudaimonia is one under a corrupting force, as opposed to a life in pursuit of... ?
Hedonism is about breaking; about destruction. I compared it to maggots previously. They show up when things are in the phase of decay.
When it comes to pursuits of life then I for my part try to start with understanding what is here, who am I - and to continue from that. Who is this me that is observing myself after all? - It's not free to be whatever it wants to be, even if it could start to believe in such illusions.
So your opinion is that a life in pursuit of eudaimonia is one under a corrupting force, as opposed to a life in pursuit of... ?
Hedonism is about breaking; about destruction. I compared it to maggots previously. They show up when things are in the phase of decay.
Once again I think that what you are describing as hedonism is something else. Hedonism is not a synonym for decadence.
Quote :
When it comes to pursuits of life then I for my part try to start with understanding what is here, who am I - and to continue from that. Who is this me that is observing myself after all? - It's not free to be whatever it wants to be, even if it could start to believe in such illusions.
Surely, but I don't think that's excluded from hedonism at all, I can easily make the case that it is actually necessary. Where it may come into conflict with other schools of thought, is on how one ought to behave, what pursuits one should engage in in his daily, one's decision making process, the direction of one's life. That is what I asked you. If you think that a life in pursuit of eudaimonia is a life under a corrupting force, what life isn't?
So I can come on here and say that nietzsche's philosophy is about stomping on kittens, and everybody has to humor me because that's MY interpretation of it, and not just tell me to go read a fucking book and come back when I am less likely to make a fool of myself? My, what a nice forum we have
You're too stupid to understand that my interpretation of hedonism is the best interpretation of hedonism -- there is nothing incorrect about it. If you want to argue otherwise, you will have to EXPLAIN to me what's so incorrect about it, rather than telling me to grab a book on hedonism (you can do that AT THE END of your post, AFTER you have explained why I'm wrong.) As it is, you are lazy, rude and stupid all at once.
I already did that before you and the other clown had even barged in the thread with your stupidity:
phoneutria wrote:
Except that is a gross misuse of the word hedonism, anfang, very common on this forum and elsewhere. Do keep in mind that the objective of hedonism is eudaimonia. Hedonism != decadence.
Please note that I am not refusing to discuss the subject. I am refusing to discuss the subject with YOU, because I find your posts to be uneducated drivel.
Did what, estupida? You mean did nothing but make yourself stupider, though happier, than before? Well then, I'll make sure your happiness does not last for too long. Let's see if your defense mechanisms are stronger than my offense mechanisms.
Quote :
Please note that I am not refusing to discuss the subject. I am refusing to discuss the subject with YOU, because I find your posts to be uneducated drivel.
Wrong, estupida, the real reason you refuse to respond to me is because you can't respond. The rest is excuse: let's be real and admit that you're just a two-bit whore. Now bend down and suck my dick instead of babbling with your mouth full of cum.
Quote :
Except that is a gross misuse of the word hedonism, anfang, very common on this forum and elsewhere. Do keep in mind that the objective of hedonism is eudaimonia. Hedonism != decadence.
So what's so unclear to you, estupida? The objective of hedonism is eudaimonia -- WOW YOU ARE SO SMART -- but that is PRECISELY the reason why hedonism == decadence (to use your favorite programming language, Ecma I suppose, and not C -- C is not for dumb bitches such as yourself.) To pose feelings as a goal is DECADENT, do you get that, you stupid fucking two-bit whore?
I ask her to explain what's so incorrect about my interpretation of hedonism and all she can pull out is "the objective of hedonism is eudaimonia". I mean, what kind of neurological disease do you have to suffer from in order to be able to assume that this can possibly qualify as an explanation, not to mention as a contradiction to what I'm saying, in at least one of the fantasy lands that can be possibly thought up?
Dumb woman.
Just stick to posting nude photos of yourself, for christsake.
As short as your skirt, I believe. So what are you telling me, black widow, is this piece of shit that you just scribbled somehow supposed to change the meaning of my post? "Eudaimonia is not a feeling" -- all she can come up with. Jesus fucking Christ.
The point is that eudaimonia represents a certain state inside our brains, and whenever one's goal is a state within one's brain, we are talking about DECADENCE, because the goal should always be something OUTSIDE OF OURSELVES.
Is this enough for you to comprehend what a dumb bitch you are? No, of course it is not.
The point is that eudaimonia represents a certain state inside our brains, and whenever one's goal is a state within one's brain, we are talking about DECADENCE because the goal should always be something OUTSIDE OF OURSELVES.
