Right, but I don't think that the 90% really would want to make the sacrifices required to make money. Entrepreneurship isn't easy, you work all day pretty much. Most people will not sacrifice their social lives for example, in order to devote that time to business. So, a priori, I wouldn't expect a lot of people to gather together to make dough. — Agustino

Yes, to some extent. Though you're really hyping up the argument by a stretch, methinks.

Why are we going to get buddies based on producing food in the ground together (the toil of the land), and not also by producing money in a money-tree where the dough naturally grows? :-$ Why does the object that we work around ultimately matter with regards to human connections? — Agustino

Because 0.1% own what 90% make through their toil. But, that's taboo to talk about, right?

I'm sorry to have made the claim implicitly or explicitly without knowing all the details. My bad, man. :(

Probably all of the above. Though, unless super harmful, I'm not puritanical, I think one definitely shouldn't kill themselves, or engage in self-destructive behavior, but the body likes stimulants, and drugs. Shiva was totes into weed. — Wosret

So, you do post under the influence! I knew it, lol.

Here's what I had to say about drugs in another thread, a rather prominent issue although not discussed here as often as it should be, in my humble opinion.

No, why? Perhaps you can explain your point of view to me. I didn't study much physics but I've studied functional analysis. Hilbert spaces aren't very mysterious at all. In fact when I learned that the mysterious bra-ket notation is nothing more than a linear functional acting on a vector, I felt enlightened, as if perhaps QM isn't that far beyond me. If you can explain to me what you're thinking I'm sure I'd learn something. Maybe there's a mystery I'm not appreciating. — fishfry

Well, I just edited that post to include Godelian unprovable truths that can exist in such a 'logical space' of sorts. I'm not entirely sure they exist in the domain of infinite Hilbert space. I may be wrong; but, reading some works by Max Tegmark was enlightening to say the least, to present the notion that there are different domains of where mathematical truths can exist but are still unprovable in lower domains of (what I call) state space's or 'logical space'.

There is no mathematical mystery to Hilbert space. — fishfry

Yes, I understand that much. But, having objects that can only exist in infinite Hilbert space isn't a mystery to you? Like, say, the very unprovable mathematical truths according to Godel?

The sufficiently heroic soul may be able to succeed without this frustrating compromise, but that only means meeting the market directly, right? — t0m

I think this is the gist of what separates the greatly endowed from the rest of the population. Knowing some deep and undiscovered truth about 'the market' over someone else in the classroom can jump-leap one's career in academia regardless of one's grades and the whole schtick with dealing with the system as you've mentioned. This has been my motivating muse for the desire to go (back) to college. I honestly, can not stand the mundane process of learning something over and over again over a generation if nothing of use can be produced out of it. But, that's the college life for you.

Being in college is daunting and there's little inspiration to be had in it nowadays unless you are gifted in some domain where your understanding of a subject can be applied. However, as you and I know, college has become a monkey see monkey do a type of interaction. I could not stand that, it was soul-crushing for me to not be able to examine the implications of questions (read, reason through) and instead just recite the answer to them as a parrot does.

But, the realization of the above leaves you with few options. Either, continue your regurgitation of information as well as you can and hope to land in some institution like the IAS, or go into the market with this 'truth' about it and derive the benefits from it. I don't know, some people just have better neural nets than I do or a more hardened psyche to endure the triviality of reciting information, that is often forgotten very fast (have a picture of the forgetting curve when I say this).

I hope I'm not ranting; but, school has become a soul-crushing experience in my opinion. I have no idea how one can change that in any way. I'm wary of returning back to school having a cat-like mind along with an above normal intellect.

I guess the issue boils down as to whether one prefers understanding or knowing something. I'm of the former, not so great with the later.

So, Hilbert was right, just not as we have come to understand it or are even able to within our current framework...

It seems intuitively obvious if you consider QM in infinite Hilbert Space or anything in infinite Hilbert Space. Degrees of freedom fly out the window, etc. etc. etc.

Yes, but, my understanding is that a theorem that can't be proved within a system can be proved by a meta-system as mentioned. So, can this process go on forever or is Godel's Incompleteness just a proof of a hard limit to this process, thus giving rise to some asymptotic behavior of the ability to prove arithmetic truths?

A la, Penrose, if one believes in mathematical Platonism and such, then there seems to be a final system that could account for all proofs in it, no?

Godel's theorem does not say that we cannot prove the statement by going outside the system. Indeed, for the unprovable statements often considered in this context, they can be proved by moving to a meta-system that is larger than the original one and consistent with it. The problem is that there will then be new statements in that meta-system that cannot be proved or disproved (are 'undecidable') in that system. So we need to move to a meta-meta-system to decide those. No matter how many times we do this, the system we end up with will contain new undecidable statements. — andrewk

Is there a transcendental-logical or arithmetic system that could account for everything or is this just stating the set of all sets that is also a self-containing set paradox?

*Burps quietly*

Kevin's a human too!

Yeah, and supposedly a rising tide lifts all boats except the poor and middle class in America.

Doesn't sound like it to me. Didn't you say earlier that you have been deeply depressed and that you suffer in your isolation and alienation? It seems to me that you are erecting rationalizations to defend your unhappy way of life so that you can avoid dealing with the issues that need to be dealt with, so that you can avoid facing your fears and overcoming challenges. — oysteroid

Yes, that all may be true; but, I have adjusted to my current state of affairs. Contrary to what you are saying, instead of fighting with my current life, I try and live it without regrets. Mind you, I made a conscious decision some ten years back that I won't regret choosing a life of celibacy or in social isolation. There really is no imperative, for me, to indulge in a vivid social life or one full of romantic relationships and sex.

Listen, I understand. I've lived this life of hiding from life and the world and taking refuge in Mom. I know it and all the thought processes and rationalizations that tend to go with it better than you do. I am older and more experienced. And I've observed the lives of others who have done this. It isn't healthy. And the more you justify it, the longer you let it go on, the worse things will eventually get. Those parts of you that cry for attention will not lie quietly down there under the lid you are trying to hide them under. You might successfully make yourself unconscious of them for a while, but they'll erupt sooner or later. If later, they'll also consume you with regret. — oysteroid

Living with mom really isn't an issue here. I don't understand how it can even be an issue apart from some sense of extremely low self-esteem and thus rationalizations to the matter.

I am nearing 41. I didn't leave home for the first time until I was 27. My next oldest brother also left home at 27, three years before I did. Our parents were far too permissive and enabling in this respect and too eager to avoid the empty nest. We were partly meeting their needs to have us remain forever as children. Also, they were aging. Since my mother and father were 45 and 48 respectively when I was born, I grew up with an acute consciousness of their mortality, and a deep fear of their deaths, especially that of my mom. When I hit twenty, my mom was 65. Her mom died at 70. I worried that maybe not much time was left and I loved her dearly, and still do. I feared that if I left home and pursued the life I wanted (art school and a career in painting), she would die soon and I'd regret not having spent what little time was still available with her. So I stayed. But it was also safety and ease and emotional security and avoiding many things that I feared that held me there. — oysteroid

Please understand, I don't intend to live with my mother for the rest of my life. I have two options ahead of me. One is to work with a friend on building an online supplement store, and the other is to go back to college to complete and further pursue a degree in economics. I figure the degree in economics would be the best long-term option; but, I want to first try and see if I can make a living without any degree at all. In some sense, taking baby steps until I feel confident that I can either live without a degree and reduce the obsessive obsession of mind with completing college or realize eventually, that it's the best option if I can't make a decent living without a degree.

Now I am nearing 41 and I feel like I've lost my own life. I am full of regret, frustration, sadness, and all sorts of things. I am especially sad about the lack of romance and children of my own and the sense that I am fulfilling my many potentials. I don't regret the time spent with the ones I love. I don't regret caring for them. — oysteroid

Your life seems full of regrets, and you don't pad yourself on the back for being a good person and looking after your mom. That's not something I understand fully. Perhaps, we are quite diametrically opposed individuals. As an artist, you value things that I don't. My only creative or artistic expressions manifest in doing philosophy. Furthermore, I have a rather difficult issue that I have to treat (somewhat similar to your Cushings disease). My issue is schizophrenia. Whether I like it or not it's a cross I will bear for the rest of my life. It's a burden; but, not untreatable.

Let me emphasize, that I also lived in Europe for almost a decade, and haven't encountered the same resistance to living with your parents as in the States. I find the level of embracing individuality, as nearing neurotic levels in the States as opposed to happily living with your parents in Europe without nowhere near the amount of regret as in the US. I guess, the European way of life in some regards is more economical, as many people end up in great debt and burdened by new responsibilities they can't handle when living unprepared on their own. The amount of credit one can obtain to support that lifestyle is absurd, in the US. It can also explain why Europeans on average have a higher rate of educated individuals than the US, because they don't resent living with their parents and have a guardian angel looking after their welfare be it the State or their parents.

McPostface, get real. — Bitter Crank

Thanks for keeping it real. I don't think I'll be returning to academia anytime soon. God, but the desire is still there. Perhaps this whole thread is some rationalization to the contrary.

I don't think I'm following here. Why is there a need for a policy? Won't it just naturally happen that, in the absence of centrally-planned intervention, degrees that people find unrewarding - whether financially, emotionally, spiritually, or in some other way - will cease to be offered because too few people sign up for them? — andrewk

Yeah; but, there's pressure on those people to commit to their major and follow through with it regardless of what they feel about it. That pressure (at least in the US) leads to a skewed distribution of students graduating from STEM-related fields rather than other ones. That's my take at least on the matter.

But I couldn't see anything to complain about in the issue raised in the OP. — andrewk

Well, it's more of a 'hey look what I think, do you agree or not?'. Personally, I think the education system is in shambles due to focusing on fulfilling the needs of the economy. I don't expect things to change anytime soon. The side effect is that you'll just have a lot of people that aren't happy with their jobs. So be it.

If anyone is interested I cross-referenced this thread on another forum. Wonder what members here think about the replies.

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/has-the-market-corrupted-the-goal-of-education.929945/

I'm not sure I follow you here. Do you mind elaborating a bit, especially as it relates to the concerns at hand? Examples might help. I am claiming that we have feelings, values, instincts, and so on, that are hardwired. Are you saying that conditioning can overcome these? — oysteroid

Well, the simplest and most elegant example I can provide to you is of the Cynics. They disregarded almost off of the things you have mentioned in your post.

And yet you say you are depressed, possibly in connection with feelings of alienation. — oysteroid

Well, that's just the biological me that I have to deal with, no other way to combat it, be it accepting or ignoring or forgetting, and etc.

Why would your isolation cause you to feel deeply depressed if you were free of the need for others? — oysteroid

What I'm saying is that I've been depressed or isolated for so long that I've built some sense of a 'shell' or tolerance to the feeling. I used to indulge in stimulant drugs to fill that void. Nowadays I just take my meds, contemplate philosophy, and that pretty much leaves me satisfied with my condition.

Cynicism, stoicism, and whatnot, certainly might urge one to try to diminish such concerns, but by liking such ideas and identifying as an adherent of such ideas, are you thereby freed of such concerns? No. Freedom from such things is an ideal, like perfect goodness, that we can get closer to, but cannot actually embody fully. — oysteroid

Yeah, there are degrees of freedom in anything, as well as being free from the typical negative and positive emotions. Cultivating a healthy balance is ideal, but some (Cynics again) take a more radical stance and throw away it all, and are left with a sense of serene comfort in their nullification of wants and desires of material goods.

Is it impossible for someone else to insult or offend you or otherwise make you feel bad with the way they treat you, excluding physical harm? If it is possible to make you feel anything negative through words, body language, expressions of disgust aimed at you, or anything of the sort, then you are not free of concern about the opinions of others. — oysteroid

I think that's an undue burden on any school of thought. Even though Buddhism comes close, there are still emotions that they encourage one to cultivate and manifest in behavior. Cynicism goes straight to the heart of the issue, and because of that are disregarded as fringe philosophers, in my opinion.

My suspicion is that at some level, you already do feel bad about certain aspects of your life, whether you'll admit it to yourself or not, and that this might be playing a role in your depression. So I intended to try to bring it forward so that you might someday address it and thereby improve your well-being. If these things truly don't bother you at all, and I am wrong, kudos to you. — oysteroid

The thing is that we might both be wrong, and I'm perfectly fine with being wrong in isolation if that's the case. Let me put this another way. I have adapted to the prospect of being on disability and living with mom. It doesn't bother me that much anymore. If I won the lottery tomorrow, I'd spend it on the mortgage on the home I live in and put the rest into an index fund and derive benefits from the dividends. One can dream, though.

To me, it is a kind of weird enlightenment or something to be truly free of the opinions of others, maybe even your own opinions of yourself. It would involve the possibility of a kind of radical authenticity. But such a condition, I have decided, is probably impossible given our nature as a social species. I think such concern can be reduced, but not eliminated. And philosophy is one of those things that can help reduce such concern, especially when you have found the given values of society to be groundless or otherwise problematic. — oysteroid

Prior to my fascination with Stoicism and Cynicism, I was impressed by the American transcendentalists. And, the name is well deserved, that is 'transcendentalism'. You can find some very impressive characters in that school of thought, even though this was due to their sheer intellect at rationalizing their behavior in contrast with what society demanded of them. I guess, call it rugged individualism. At some point in my life, I felt that I needed to integrate more with society and tried joining the military. I couldn't handle the lack of control in the newly command style of life found in the military. Biologically, I also had issues that prevented me from functioning in the new environment. So, I'm saying that I've tried, and everything has led up to this point in my life, and I'm jolly fine with it. I wouldn't be so jolly had I not tried integrating (military, college, minimum wage job) etc.

I'd be very surprised if such people exist. If they do, I'd bet they are mutants of some kind, like people who totally lack empathy or can't feel pain. — oysteroid

Oh, they have existed, philosophy is abound with such unique and peculiar individuals.

As for Frankl, the main point I took away wasn't stoicism, but rather the idea that having a sense of purpose, a goal, something to look forward to, hope for the future, and so on, made a huge difference for people in the concentration camps. Those without these didn't do well. Those who did tended to get along better. And being able to find meaning in the suffering itself tends to be helpful. This fits with the title of the book and his whole system of logotherapy. — oysteroid

Well, what I took away from his book, is that people always have, irrespective of what circumstances they are in, a choice to decide what state of mind they want to be in. Yes, goals, purpose, the future, and so on, all facilitate the meaning of that choice. Some people, claim it's an existential work of art; but, I felt that Frankl meant it to be read in a Stoical manner. That's my opinion at least. [Edit], I'm actually quoting from the book I have in my hands right now:

What was really needed was a fundamental change in our attitude toward life. We had to learn ourselves and, furthermore, we had to teach the despairing men, that it did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life - daily and hourly. One answer must consist, not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct.

Powerful, stuff. I know I've somewhat failed on most of what he recommends one doing. It's not a type of therapy for the masses, that's for sure.

I'm not going to address your whole post because there are limitations to what can be said in words. However, I can say that none of this bothers me from any POV be it an evolutionary biological one or not. I don't believe that one's nature ought or even can dictate the nurture aspect of living.

Not to sound presumptuous; but, I feel as though my philosophy of life, which has become more cynical rather than stoical trumps what you have said, and that's why I don't really think badly of my life or at least I don't ruminate over what others think of me and such. I live happily with my mom, as many others do nowadays because of or as a result of my economics and disabled status. It's not bothersome to me anymore as I mentioned in my first post. I guess I should really stop mentioning that I'm 27 and live with my mom anymore; because that just spurs a picture of some stereotype person or some such matter.

But, I do have to say that you are deeply imbued with what others would think about your situation or what is socially right to do. As a sort of Cynic, I find it amusing that anyone would be so concerned with that. To each his own, I guess.

Oh, and I have read Victor Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning. It's a fascinating book that at its core (in my view) professes a stoic attitude towards whatever predicament one find themselves in life and making the best out of it.

Sometimes people show up and it seems like they are really searching and maybe lost. — T Clark

Then what do you suggest we do about them? The only thing that comes to my mind is to count on others who have felt lost or felt angst and found what they were looking for.

They need and deserve to be taken seriously. — T Clark

And we do take them seriously. If something is beyond the ability on these forums to do, then we often tell the person that professional help is what is the best solution.

My heart goes out to them and I want to protect them from the rough and tumble this forum sometimes is. — T Clark

Fortunately, there are good people on these forums. I won't mention any because I would have to mention them all, and there are so many.

I have been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. I know depression, but anxiety has always been what hurt the most. There's nothing wrong with being depressed, but giving advice to a depressed person is very dangerous. I've noticed that a lot of people on this forum do not treat vulnerable people with the restraint they need and deserve.

I am not talking about you in particular, but it's true - this forum is not necessarily a safe place for people who are struggling. — T Clark

I can't argue over anxiety, it is rather a difficult emotion to deal with.

But, I fail to see how this forum and depression can have anything in common. Even if this place is, as you say, full of depressed people, there's probably no better place to find some information about how to deal with depression than this forum. You do know that philosophy is a form of self-therapy, right, and the general sentiment hereabouts is that depression is not an inherent evil.

One thing I would warn you about, this site is full of depressed people. That might make you feel at home or, if you believe them too much, drive you deeper into yourself. I think this forum can be a dangerous place for vulnerable people. The people here are also extremely smart and observant and they write really well. You express yourself well also, which is a valuable thing. — T Clark

There's nothing inherently wrong with being depressed? If we can agree on that, then what's the point of pointing it out?

Some people just like to wallow in their depression. I do.

I know that some people might find it unimaginable to accept their diagnosis of depression; however, they seem like the hardest cases to treat, and at a predisposition to contemplate suicide more-so than the person that just accepts their predicament and moves on in life being depressed or not depressed.

Thanks for sharing that poignant personal experience. Contrary to you, my isolation has manifested itself in the form of a deep mood called 'depression'. You don't seem like the depressed guy due to your feeling of alienation and isolation. However, the only thing in my time-space (being 27 years old on disability) that I can relate to is going back to college. I have enormous difficulty learning the material because my head will raise two more questions to one seeking an answer to, that need answering. I also know from a close friend that without a degree in engineering or computer science, it doesn't really matter where you graduate from to get a decent job.

Anyway, what I'm getting at is that your sort of stuck in front of the anglerfish light that are values you've been raised with or observed and are still lured by it. I'd say detach yourself from those luring values that other's are lured to (like sheep), and pursue in great esteem and accept your life for what it is, unique, intelligent, and sensitive. There are other ways to contribute to society.

I mean, I live with my mother and don't see anything else in the world (depressingly) as of more value than being together with her and supporting her. We're both poor; but, are happy in our poverty. Sure, the ideas come flooding back to go to college, stay there as long as possible, and possibly prosper; but, I'm a guy that is easily entertained by philosophy and the sorts, so those ideals are receding into the past, and hopefully more-so in the future.

What I'm getting at, is that there has been a neurotic perversion of the self-being instilled in the new generation of people since, oh, the 50's-60's. Neoliberalism is still going strong and the only thing keeping it going is the same people obsessing over themselves and their relative position in the socio-economic ladder.

I've embraced my alienation from other people and society. Don't really feel much regret or anger over it. It's just who I am, and if I am what I am, then that's all that I 'yam.

This is the part that creates problems. — Rich

...

I study philosophy in order to better understand life, and when I say study, I mean by actively participating in all aspects of life including politics, arts, sports, history, psychology, literature, science, health, etc. — Rich

Some would say your trying to find some deeper meaning to your life, or at the very least your not satisfied with them on face value. Though I understand that the art of living cannot be embraced on an online forum, that is some sort of substitute for a poor and broken mind.

I'm in dire need of help. I need to find a 'distraction', something to take my mind away from the system/stresses of everyday living. On my commute to work I often find myself hoping for someone to crash into me just to make the cycle of life more interesting — Reece

Well, I think you're in the right place. I tend to this of these forums as a self-help guide/process. I'm still not halfway through my own therapy process.

Part of the reason for this is that we haven't found a way to earn $$ out of doing philosophy, so the time you spend philosophising is time in which you're not engaged with the economy, and hence you're isolated. Zizek wouldn't feel like we do for example. If we found a way to earn money and live off doing philosophy - without being philosophy professors obviously - then it wouldn't be such a big issue. — Agustino

Yes, but I have in mind the mind of the alienated individual who freely chooses to be alienated and in some sense or manner despises the masses due to their own lack of edifying interest in philosophy. Marx probably stands out as the most alienated feeling philosopher of the whole bunch; but, was able to grasp the minds of millions, and still does to this day.

Although there were philosophers in the past that made a good living out of their trade, we're known as sophists rather than pure philosophers. Why is that?

Hope you are in good health? — Reece

Thank you, a little overweight; but, doing fine.

I'm still struggling to find a reason to participate in human society. I don't like the idea that we are to live to a certain expectation, School>College>University>Work>Retirement etc. Do you think I could survive if I chose to stop working tomorrow? I think not, as apparently it's becoming illegal (in places) to live off-grid. The everyday problems humanity encounter are by design of a corrupt system pedaled by a minority. How is it that ancient civilizations were able to determine things we have only recently discovered, yet they had it written on/in tablets and scrolls? This is but a fragment of problems, the issue is we are not asking the questing of how, how was it possible for them to know despite to official story of 'evolution and the ages'. — Reece

It's mostly just a thing we just do and not rationalize over that much. I guess the easy answer is that we just conform to our past or present authoritarian structures and staus quo.

We're being deprived of knowledge and it makes me angry that I have to live among people who just accept the 'official stories'. I often want to just quit my job because off the things people say around me. They literally have no wisdom and can't think for themselves. People use concepts/sciences taught by evil to make misguided decisions/conclusions. — Reece

Hey, if it makes you feel better, I don't believe in the original 9/11 explanation as to three buildings falling down due to office fires, all in one day, and with the precedent being that it has never happened before or since 9/11. Strange day.

I don't know any 'acclaimed philosophers', it's never appealed to me that I should seek peace/consolation in others. Should you not live by your own compass and not someone else? All be it completely fine to do so as your freedom to choose.

It's becoming more a problem for me to the point I'm avoiding social confrontations to prevent talking about such topics. If I could take humans out of the equation my desire to never see or hear anything would lessen. — Reece

Yeah, I'm in the same boat. People to some degree disgust me nowadays. I'm not better than them though, and at least that realization helps me function and interact when necessary around them.

Best regards.

That is actually a great idea. The first time I was introduced to philosophy was when I was around 14 and I had a dodgy, second-hand The Last Days of Socrates that I read as I travelled on the train to the countryside. I just remember being blown away by some parts of it, as though it helped articulate pre-existing thoughts that I couldn't explain but it was already there. I may just do the same, reflect on how much things have changed since then. And yes, I get what you mean; honour, loyalty, things that have escaped contemporary versions of 'man'. — TimeLine

I started going to once a month Buddhist meetings around in my area. They're definitely good to be around with many other people who feel the same way or actually act in a manner consistent within an ethical framework, and boy Buddhism is quite a philosophy of life. Easy on paper, practice? Not so much.

Learning from mistakes is a gratifying experience because it enables progress and hating people around you is really projecting a hatred for yourself and on the contrary your desire for others is the actually self-centered narcissism though it may not appear that way; the desire to be connected to people that do not live up to this expectation causes this hatred. It is taking a responsibility, really, and this 'want' is often virtuous, moral in nature, to improve and do better for the right reasons. It is like Emerson said, that moderate balance between the individual who refuses to conform but who is nevertheless concerned with and a part of society; to spend time discussing moral concerns of a social and political nature, before going home and thinking about how you can improve. It is that balance. — TimeLine

I did like his friend, Henry David Thoreau, Walden. I liked B. F. Skinners Walden Two a lot more though, heh.

You will come to find the compassion when you take responsibility for yourself, to count only on yourself and you will see most people conform because they become absorbed by their environment and it is their environment that is fake and superficial; they conform because they too desire the same camaraderie. You can indulge in the anger, as though you are trying to wake them from their slumber and indeed when you think of vicious 'honour' killings, I hardly think having a conversation with them will inspire such change, but in the end it is a broader systemic problem that takes advantage of this innate weakness in humanity. When you take responsibility for yourself and find that independence, you inspire both antagonism and deep affection (I have anyway) where there are those that try their best to defend tooth and nail the idea that conforming is a must that you are an 'enemy' of this, or deep affection because they are aware that something is wrong and you epitomise the independence that they want themselves but fail to know how to apply it practically. — TimeLine

I have no desire to take responsibility for anything. I just accept things as they come along. To a point though, as I am no sage.

The pursuit of love is the greatest of all pursuits. It is pathetic and highly narcissistic if you choose to avoid real love, but the attempt or pursuit begins with friendship. Learn to be friends with others while finding that philosophical independence [which is to learn how to give love, to understand and feel empathy] but don't forget to live in the meantime. It is to be morally worthy, loving, and content but all with a genuine and conscious will. — TimeLine

Have a laugh:

I recently sang the Beatles' Let It Be when I went camping and I made a guy cry even though I don't have a great singing voice. I view the world exactly as the lyrics portray. — TimeLine

I think the Stoics got it right, along with their bedfellows the Cynics. I've always lived more of a Cynic life than a stoic one for the matter.

I guess this passage really expresses the malaise I feel.

8. Don't demand that things happen as you wish, but wish that they happen as they do happen, and you will go on well.

Epictetus, Enchiridion.

Thanks for the reply, wasn't really expecting any.

I went ahead and bought some 'back to basics' books I relied on upon heavily in the past. The single most influential book that gave me sanity in face of adversity and trials, has to be Marcus Aurelius' Meditations. It's more of a 'man's' book if you get what I mean.

I figure, I learned some lessons and will return to my old stoic self. Being a stoic is comforting and helps me rise above this malaise I am professing in the OP. I don't want to end up hating being around people if that is not already something I feel as if what is becoming a reality. Though there is a small amount of some self-centered narcissism being professed here, I must add. So to speak, 'look at me' I don't care about what you care about, and I feel better about myself because of that.

Feeling as though through the years, that the only person I can really count on is my mother and closest family, everything else seems like a (excuse my language) fucking joke or facade, which really makes me (ferment?) inside.

I want to be good; but, if people don't reward people who are good, then what's the point other than some sense of elevation above other people? Dare I say, is being a good person also stems from a desire to feel superior to other people? Hard to say...

Anyway, glad things are working out for you in the best. I've given up on college. I want to see how low I can go before life forces something on me to do or maybe fall in love, haha. Now, I just sound pathetic. A philosopher's life I guess?

As an interesting side note, many priests and religious leaders consider philosophy the subject just behind by one step to religion itself.

And, how much melancholy do we see in religion? Tons of it. The whole thing from the Abrahamic tradition is based on the fall of mankind from Eden, and then all misery starts. Even in Greek'o-Roman polytheistic theology, there were strong notions of melancholy...

Nitpicking an individual and saying that it's mostly due to their own bias or such is just a pure ad hom in my mind.

To me it makes sense that he's "fringe." — t0m

Yeah seems so too.

The more I think about the world, the more I love it. The more I feel home in it. I belong here. All of us do. You do. Some philosophies hide that fact. I don't know why. — T Clark

Someone is sane. Can the same be said of other philosophers? I wish there was some sanity check before reading Nietzsche or Schopenhauer. There is some great comfort in the nihilism of the continentals that I've read about on these forums. Why care if there's no obligation to care according to Nietzsche or Schopenhauer?

I would say that the limit isn't when the ding an sich is discovered; but, comes even before then. In other words, it isn't a known unknown; but, rather an unknown unknown. Even that what we think we know about can be an unknown known about the ding an sich.

Looks like a good read.

Schopenhauer clearly said that salvation can be found in the object of art and aesthetics. Where the will is not manifest and where the self-becomes one with the piece or work of art. Why does that so often fly out the window when discussing Schopenhauer baffles me, and speaks of the bias of the reader at heart.

The map is not the territory.

It is hope that is the opiate of the masses. — schopenhauer1

Where does 'meaning' fit into this. Hope seems like that dopamine release from the presynaptic channel to the postsynapses, while meaning is the response one gets from that 'hope'. Or is it the other way around?

Hope without meaning seems linked to such a degree that talking about one without the other what the elephant in the room is like to not be spoken of.