Other than the Terror Management Theory I haven't heard any thoughts on existentialism that wowed me. This is a hard topic in real life since most people just hit blunts and go, "Whatever we do wont matter in 100 years maaan."
What are your thoughts Veeky Forums?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
It's true though, even the greatest of us won't be remembered in 10,000 years.The very act of attempting to create the illusion of an artifical meaning of life in a universe where those meanings would be meaningless in a few milleniums is "the absurd" xD
philosophy killing cancer
all their work is essentially
We agree we cannot know nuffin therefore its ok to be wrong
they enabled all the faggotry you see today
I thought the absurd was trying to imagine your own unexisitance. Like remembering the time before you were born and other impossibilities.
read Stirner
Little dumb.
People didn't have proper ways to record their writings 2000 years ago, yet some of their work still survives.
If we seal the entire wikipedia collection in the current state of the art disk in vacuum, it will survive billions of years from now on. The disk would be the size of a penny, and it would be able to store database the size of wikipedia thousands of times over.
What we do absolutely matters in how the future shapes itself and remembers us. If we destroy ourselves then nothing can be remembered. If we flourish the civilization and advance the science/technology, then the sum of all knowledge will accumulate and be stored safely. Eventually there will come a time when we have strong enough computers, enough knowledge recorded of people to actually simulate the people in given time period and we'd run millions of these simulations.
Dude what if we are already in a simulation being projected on a cosmic hologram?!
Proof?
Literally ZERO (0) proof
Existentialism can hardly be defined as a unified system of thought. Its prominent figureheads disagreed on a tremendous amount of things, they just discussed similar topic matters, asked similar questions, and had similar approaches to answering them.
Proof of what?
>i know i'm only a speck of sand now but my life was important to me dammit!!!
>If we seal the entire wikipedia collection in the current state of the art disk in vacuum, it will survive billions of years from now on.
whta about trillions, quadrillions, quintillions, etc.?
what if the universe implodes?
that.
in the long run, nothing matters.
we will probably never leave this tiny planet.
just enjoy your time here while you can,
There are theories that universe may indeed last forever. In such case, any recorded instance would be valuable not to me but to future generations.
>Things are meaningless simply because they aren't eternal
Nihilists make me chuckle.
Where is objective value derived from?
>objective value
That's what I said.
Then what would be the purpose of this simulation
To find out if you're smart enough to get out of the sim or to contact the sim creators.
Reminder that Nihilists are hypocrites. They claim that all life is meaningless but will still continue to live because their lives do actually have value to them, invalidating their own philosophy
While true that the lives of humans is limited that doesn't mean everything we do is worthless, as long as it feels fulfilling doing something is worth doing. It's not that hard to understand, even the Egyptians understood this, that's why they built the Pyramids.
TL;DR: Nihilism is a meme life isn't, if you disagree actually kill yourself.
But if life is meaningless, then death is also meaningless. So really it's fine either way.
Things are meaningless until you give the meaning
most "existentialist philosophers" don't talk that much about metaphysics, i think the only reason why people associate the term with "whoah man is everything an illusion???" is because it almost has the word "existence" in it. most existentialism is about human freedom in a world otherwise devoid of "meaning" in the way a human conceives it
God. Now fuck off to >>>>>>>>/reddit/>>>>>>>>. I remember when I was 16, edgelord.
>Where is objective value derived from?
Whatever transcendent thing you consider having the most value. For some people it's God, for others it's simply a way to conceptualize the fact that it is possible to live a life that is so meaningful that you won't be in a pit of despair and sardonic irony until you finally die.
you'll be rewarded in the afterlife for having lived a philosophical life (at least according to the empirical evidence of historical prophets promising an afterlife for virtue)
it's so good to enjoy material privilege meanwhile traditionalists and humanists are angry at the sight of what they most cherish being trampled upon in an uncaring world stomping their churches and the bones of their darling oppressed
it is useful to manipulate the herd into building pyramids if it makes our material privilege possible at the expense of other sentients (i wouldn't call being able to afford comfortable nice things a serious "value" though, at least not in the sense of traditionalist simpletons or humanistic imbeciles)
i'll totally make an effort for things different than my belly even without a reward in the afterlife
...
Don't they just think nothing has inherent value, just the value human beings ascribe to it? Makes sense to me. I can't imagine genuinely seeing no value in anything just because that value isn't inherent and objective.
But humans having a subjective adherence to the value of life literally means there's objective value and this proves god
that's a blind istinct, much like the instinct making me evaluate my comfortable standards of life more relevant than the survival of starving children (too bad if others evaluate differently)
