Being a Stoic is bland, being a pessimist is cool, hip, attention-grabbing and contrarian. — darthbarracuda
The latter are unintended but welcome side effects of our position. — Thorongil
In all seriousness, the day pessimists are considered anything but unwanted cranks interrupting The Glorious Progress of the Human Race™ is the day I buy a hat in order to eat it. — Thorongil
We are not content, nor can we ever be, when life demands that we desire and want- sources of suffering. There is no way to escape it, even in principle. Thus, no practice of indifference will truly get rid of the Will/flux/becoming. — schopenhauer1
I'm not sure about contentment. I've certainly felt respite, but it feels more like getting a break to breathe from drowning. Not only is it not a positive enjoyment, but rather one that's only defined relative to just how bad what was previously happening was, but it's also backhanded in that that respite is precisely what allows you to live and continue to suffer more. — The Great Whatever
Can't argue with this. Pessimism will never garner strength as a major philosophy because most people are unfortunately brainwashed into the progress mentality. It runs against all they have been taught. — darthbarracuda
I have moderated my position. Yes, I remember that post I made a year ago...when I was very angsty and depressed. I am getting better now. And I can assure you I am not trolling.
Furthermore, I don't quite see the importance of understanding my position. Isn't it enough to read what I have posted in this thread without trying to piece together what my entire philosophy is? That's going beyond the scope of the thread. I have supplemented you with my thoughts on the topic (of pessimism vs stoicism), and whether or not this contradicts something I said over a year ago shouldn't really have any basis in the discussion. — darthbarracuda
Mainly that I can't tell anyone how to feel — schopenhauer1
Progress is ultimately doomed though, whether it be from our own self destruction or the eventual heat death of the universe. It is inevitable. — darthbarracuda
think Schopenhauer had a bad case of of a bad attitude and was pissy that his colleagues were getting dates and lectures while he wasn't. So he became caustic and bitter and transformed it into a kind of miserable pride. — darthbarracuda
It's more like Schopenhauer was unable to find company which matched his; and therefore he preferred none. — Agustino
I think Schopenhauer was a genius - and he had all the right in the world to mock mere mortals. — Agustino
You think a genius of his stature couldn't manipulate a woman to sleep with him?
That's surely seductive talk to any woman. Or how about...?Women are directly adapted to act as the nurses and educators of our early childhood, for the simple reason that they themselves are childish, foolish, and short-sighted—in a word, are big children all their lives, something intermediate between the child and the man, who is a man in the strict sense of the word. Consider how a young girl will toy day after day with a child, dance with it and sing to it; and then consider what a man, with the very best intentions in the world, could do in her place. — Schopenhauer
The nobler and more perfect a thing is, the later and slower is it in reaching maturity. Man reaches the maturity of his reasoning and mental faculties scarcely before he is eight-and-twenty; woman when she is eighteen; but hers is reason of very narrow limitations. This is why women remain children all their lives, for they always see only what is near at hand, cling to the present, take the appearance of a thing for reality, and prefer trifling matters to the most important. — Schopenhauer
In my experience, really smart guys can have a lot of trouble with women. This is not always the case, but very often is. — Pneumenon
This is pathetic. You should be aware that Schopenhauer is doing metaphysics, and as such he's talking about the position that Nature has allotted to women. His talk is not meant to be seductive at all; an entirely different form of discourse. — Agustino
Now the fact that your average woman in Western society today would feel insulted by those sentences says nothing of their truth, but merely proves Schopenhauer's point. — Agustino
It's a historical fact that, in general, women were not gifted by Nature with the capacities for reason that man has. — Agustino
Sorry my friend. Historical evidence strongly disagrees with you. Your "scientific proof" must agree and be capable to explain other empirical facts as well.No it's not. And it's scientifically false. — Marchesk
You want to know something else? Women live longer than men on average, despite those difficult nine months of labor. — Marchesk
Historical evidence strongly disagrees with you. — Agustino
Historical evidence that is written by man simply because man has bigger, stronger muscles. You may also recall that practically every single war was waged by a man who wanted to show the world how big his penis was. — darthbarracuda
You're bordering the naturalistic fallacy here. Just because women are suitable for giving birth and raising children doesn't mean that's all they can or ought to do. — darthbarracuda
No, historical evidence written by the facts. The scientific/philosophical developments have, historically, been driven mostly by men. This is undisputable. It's not only historical accounts which justify this, but also the utter lack of evidence of a similar number of scientific inventions/discoveries or philosophical systems developed by women. — Agustino
and neither did Schopenhauer as a matter of fact... — Agustino
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.