"Do what I want you to, I'll do what I want to you" — SuperAJ96

And the world becomes one, not funny.
But of course, I have my own take on this: 'Do unto others as you would do unto you.' Remark how 'them' are no longer a part of the process. Fine, I know it sounds bad, basically Kant, but in my defence I though it before him as in before he existed, for me. That's the enlightenment spirit, after all.

Human life value is the value humans are willing to give to their lifes. To find that out, humans can put themselves questions like: 'At what point would I be willing to sell / sacrifice (depending on their values) myself?' and 'Does suicide make any sense to me?'. To find out a current objective value of human life, you may need to calculate the added value humanity is responsible for and then divide it by the number of humans that existed and died till this point.

I DARE YOU to be truthful with yourself! So be genuine, even if you grow, learn, develop, decay remain the one you always were at your core because that's not really a choice anyway but you can still take pride in maintaining your basic perception of yourself and even derive satisfaction from restricting your relation with the world. Short: make sense.

So you avoid being nuked by nuking 1st, you say? How does that even work?
And yes, I could use a nuclear weapon, where can I get one?

there is the argument that anger is natural, and that we must only regulate it. It seems to me that if anger is defined as: the desire to hurt someone else in retaliation, then it is not necessary. — anonymous66

That's funny because anger is the very desire to regulate something that disturbs you.
There's a point to every emotion as long as it's not pointless, it's just the philosophy of the obvious.

And taking acts so personal (the physical acts of sex) and making them public just seems wrong. — anonymous66

Privacy is meant to be provided and assured by society, not dictated, meaning it is up to us what to keep personal and what to make public.

And doesn't the porn industry just promote the idea that people are merely a means to an end? — anonymous66

I argue that the porn industry's actions and/or intentions don't define pornography, that you confuse pornography with sexual objectification and that the porn industry doesn't really promote such sexual objectification as much as it reinforces it. The last may seem just a pointless argument about semantics but what I mean is that demand makes porn as objectifying as it is, it's not an inherent trait of porn itself.

You talk about porn as seeming wrong to you. I ask you: why is that? My guess is that you either don't understand its purpose, thinking any sexual activity should be reserved for procreation or that, at the opposite pole, you view sex as more than baby-making, like as an expression of passion and most porn out there fails to support that view, being as dispassionate as it is, and so becomes revolting.

1. Is philosophy as a science having some basic principles or some undeniable truth about the things that it examines? — kris22

Question that which you don't understand. Let yourself think freely. Try to make sense of things.

2. Is there a discussion among other people in the methodology of philosophy? — kris22

We're having one right now.

3. Are there strict rules in philosophy such as in mathematics, or can anyone create his own philosophy and worldview? — kris22

No shitposting, flaming or trolling, it seems.