"all your philosophy is pointless user, none of it is applicable to the real world...

>"all your philosophy is pointless user, none of it is applicable to the real world, I care more about making a lot of money than any of that pointless stuff"
How do you respond Veeky Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

That sounds like a philosophy to me op. Pure self interest. Stirner would kinda smile

You don't. Deeds are what matters in life. Fee-fees and "le profound deep thoughts" don't. Just meekly hang your head up and walk away.

your time is more valuable than arguing with plebs
t. Veeky Forums poster

...

classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html

46. Never call yourself a philosopher, nor talk a great deal among the unlearned about theorems, but act conformably to them. Thus, at an entertainment, don't talk how persons ought to eat, but eat as you ought. For remember that in this manner Socrates also universally avoided all ostentation. And when persons came to him and desired to be recommended by him to philosophers, he took and- recommended them, so well did he bear being overlooked. So that if ever any talk should happen among the unlearned concerning philosophic theorems, be you, for the most part, silent. For there is great danger in immediately throwing out what you have not digested. And, if anyone tells you that you know nothing, and you are not nettled at it, then you may be sure that you have begun your business. For sheep don't throw up the grass to show the shepherds how much they have eaten; but, inwardly digesting their food, they outwardly produce wool and milk. Thus, therefore, do you likewise not show theorems to the unlearned, but the actions produced by them after they have been digested.

23. If you ever happen to turn your attention to externals, so as to wish to please anyone, be assured that you have ruined your scheme of life. Be contented, then, in everything with being a philosopher; and, if you wish to be thought so likewise by anyone, appear so to yourself, and it will suffice you.

The entire thing is short and worth re-reading

probably quote Marx and explain how only ideological idiots view liberty in terms of the material which is the basis of the western moral landscape

good link

>So that if ever any talk should happen among the unlearned concerning philosophic theorems, be you, for the most part, silent. For there is great danger in immediately throwing out what you have not digested.
the original lurk moar

They're not wrong. Philosophy is knowledge for knowledge's sake, like the people who study math well beyond what's required for their profession

I would tell them that even seemingly pointless work can lead to developments which can become applicable to the real world. I would then instruct him to read Adorno's texts on instrumental reason and I would tip my fedora and exit stage right.

>anything pure or theoretical is pointless and inferior to one's particular taste in things

It's not inferior, but it is pointless if you value pursuits with tangible benefits

>tangible benefits
What do you mean?

Benefits that aren't just subjective. Stuff like money and women

What if philosophy teaches you to not want these things, or at least limit your desires? Not just the stoics, but Montaigne and Schopenhauer, who take it to the next level.

Money and women are subjective benefits, though. As a man who values learning and self-improvement, for example, I actually consider women a detriment.

Tangible benefits tend to be more universally appreciated. Enjoying access to resources and women is probably hardwired into the DNA of most men.

I agree with the woman aspect, and that's currently what I'm going through (i.e., can having a girlfriend/wife coeexist with a stoic set of principles). My conclusion: to some extent, but fuck is it hard. Still, if anything, reading makes you self-aware of this stuff (maybe too aware? Cf. DeLillo and Joyce). Fuck.

"And I care more about philosophy than making a lot of money" would be my answer. If they think that's stupid, I honestly don't care.

>I care more about making a lot of money than any of that pointless stuff"
tell him he'd better have invested when ETH was $14 in february, if he says no just laugh in his face

braap
>actions produced by them after they have been digested
what actions would those be? if you're a neet you don't have anything to show for your existence, but if you read philosophy (eat grass as it were) you wouldn't produce anything other than shitposting
>but the actions produced by them
again, what actions would those be?

how to conduct yourself. No one said you have to be a NEET, but if we're going to indulge and you're a NEET or a hermit, are you still not EVER going to be in company with anyone else? Perhaps Epictetus is implying you should be in company.

I know literature and philosophly are tightly connected but I've never finished any pure philosophical work and probably never will because it bores me, sorry Veeky Forums

The just life is rewarding for its own sake.

Literature with philosophical themes > pure philosophy
Prove me wrong philosofags

Ask him what he is spending that money on and why.

the distinction between "literary" writing and "philosophical" writing (being that in ""pure philosophy"") is a difference based upon an unstable exclusion, whose instability points towards an arch-writing.

the valuation that one is greater than the other is foolish because it fundamentally fails to address this aporia, in addition to the gluttonous nature of literature at large

> if you're a neet you don't have anything to show for your existence, but if you read philosophy (eat grass as it were) you wouldn't produce anything other than shitposting

It's almost like you shouldn't tell others how to live based on your WOW SO PROFOUND DEEP THOUGHTS when you don't even have your own shit figured out. Why would you think you would be able to tell others how to live a fulfilling life if you don't live one yourself?

>Ok cool have fun
Or if you want to be a little bit more snarky
>Material wealth doesn't serve any purpose either, for there is no clear purpose to life itself. Your purpose is just as valid as mine, the fact that you just obey to yours while i consciously follow mine is but a minor difference.

no the literature is unilaterally inferior

storybooks have no truth value

during the enlightenment they acted as a memetic vector to spread ideas (generally the bad ones)

lit is a historical disaster

You don't know shit about stoicism, you're just a fag making excuses for his virginity.

Do a 360 and walk away

Rebuttaled by:
>Purpose is a strictly personal affair one assigns to himself or not, the weak dare not commit and will insist on their retreat to nihilsm and thereby resign themselves to an unfulfilled and unsatisfied misguided life of rationalized cowardice.

Cool.

>Philosophy is knowledge for knowledge's sake
delete yourself

True patricians understand that both are good in different ways.
lrn2speek gud english
Rebutted by
>Rebutted* :^)

Thank you for correcting.

No problem, cuck.

That's you, stop projecting your perversions.

You meekly accepted my usage. A chad patrician imposes his meaning upon the cucks, as I did you.

You corrected me and for that I am grateful, no need to insecurely pretend it is a proportional error indicative of my worth, I have no ground for questioning that.
As a true chad I will leave you to entertain yourself with such petty delusions and imaginary grandiose extensions of assumed truths.

Buy olive presses

try caring about making a lot of money when you are dead