How do we fix modern philosophy?

If you're referring to the partitions or hierarchy of souls, then yes. Although, I don't know why you start there; I'm not married to a specific partitioning of the soul, and it wouldn't affect the underlying point of classical supremacy in metaphysics, morality, political science, and economics.

Not that user but buddhisms foothold on ancient chinese society did not rest on its intellectual rigor. It rested on whether the rulers of X dynasty chose it as the official religion or ideology for some reason. Same with Christianity in the west, Constantine's conversion was a pivotal factor in christianty's foothold in the west and wasnt a result of serious intellectual contemplation, he saw a sign in the sky during a battle if i remembered correctly and converted as a result. Of course the number of Christians was continuing to grow and could have been stemmed if emperors like julian the apostate were more effective at it (though this could be attributed to the lack of pagan cohesion and lack of a more complete system to replace it with) where as in china the neo confucions and daoists were more revitalized and had no trouble once the newer dynasties favored them.

I have not read anything worthy from a Buddhist, and never met any worthy adherent of their sects. Perhaps someone will come forward and show otherwise, but until then I am quite certain that nothing but intellectual poison seeped out of the lands that separate Hellas and China.

Buddhism may have been repressed but it always reflourished in china once the conditions favored them again. However i will concede that buddhism isn't exactly effective at the sovereign level and would fall away in times of war or political upheaval. This doesn't mean its not philosophically rooted.

Buddhism was influential enough to be picked up by ancient greeks, in fact one greek king became a buddhist during his reign in the bactrian kingdom. I dont see how its intellectual poison if it was worthy enough to be recognised by the greeks (and chinese) to which you praise.

>Perhaps someone will come forward and show otherwise

Show what, a worthy buddhist text? A worthy buddhist adherent? You have to be a little more specific than 'come before me and prove your worthiness'.

>I feel like you need to read up more on contemporary philosophy, we've advanced pretty far past what the Greeks came up with.
Modern Ethics is completely shit compared to Classical Ethics. It doesn't even deserve to be called Ethics.

...

Buddhism and Hinduism aren't simply philosophies, they're investigations into consciousness. It's impossible to refute any major point of Buddhism other than the lack of self as being wrong, and if you choose to refute lack of self then you find yourself in atheistic vedanta. Dry philosophy alone will never bring one to the truth, as one is simply hovering on the mental platform. This is the fault of Western philosophy and why it is so divergent. It relies on mind. Buddhism and Hinduism transcend this mental platform and attain the spiritual platform by way of studying consciousness through applied techniques like meditation. In this way you no longer theorize or speculate in reality, but actually experience reality.

Stop paying attention to it?

I wish Taoism & Hinduism were more popular throughout history.

Something really irks me at how Buddhism has sat in a favouried position despite some really dark periods of history, along with Confucianism and the Abrahmic three. I might be wrong on the first two because it's a little hard to find out how they've interwoven in society without doing some deep singular research but there's something about Hindu/Dao that makes me wish they took off instead in some critical time periods.

Any of you shaggas have thoughts on all this?

Isn't Hinduism essentially the same as the pre-Christian European mythologies like Norse paganism, Roman paganism, etc.?

From what I understand they had more or less the same gods and same philosophy, just in different languages.

t. Chang

Are you american?

Why

good post

positivist genocide

In the earliest stage, PIE, or at the very first separations, they probably were similar, but when fully separated into hittites, slavs, etc no fucking way.

>same gods
Not fully as all branches incorporated local deities. Plus a lot of deities were abandoned, exalted, etc according to local developments. Not even the approach to them remained the same.

>same philosophy
Lol no. Literally no. India, Greece and Hittites specially took a lot from the locals. Iran developed the God-Satan duality thay took root in abrahamic religions. Different branches in different settings with different realities = different philosophies and cosmovisions, even if the base was the same.

In India the native non PIE element is very, very strong.

>ethics, nietzsche, atheism
>the state of philosophy in circa 12017 HE

>julian the apostate were more effective at it
If Julian had wore his breastplate and had a reign of at least 5 years, Christianity would have been made irrelevant in Europe. The only Christians at the time were some slave, a small amount of women, and some politicians who wanted to use it to control the population.

>advanced
LADS WE ARE REACHING PEAK LIBERALISM

The problem is intellectual laziness and arrogance. Too many university philosophy course devolve into irresponsible reductionism and mental masturbation. Force undergrads to write long essays about each era of philosophy before they can move on to the next one.

Philosophy and "hard work" must be synonymous before the subject can be respectable again.

I fix it on my own, you can´t. Cogere.

It's fixing itself. Moral realism, rational theology, the hard problem of consciousness, and metaphysics in general are all taken more seriously now than 30 years ago.

the same thing in my school, it's ironic that she taught us about fallacies using a lot of fallacies, public education