Reminder that Darwinism killed religion, all of metaphysics...

Reminder that Darwinism killed religion, all of metaphysics, and every single homocentric philosophy ever to have existed (e.g. humanism).

How's that?

What about Whiteheadian Metaphysics?

Not really? Sapience is the origin of philosophy and reason, there's nothing to say those tools can't be turned on their progenitor. Cognito Ergo Sum and all that.

What science killed was ontology, which was pointless to begin with because all it taught us was that human reasoning is expressly fallible.

>What science killed was ontology

Mind explaining how it managed to do that?

Remind that once more has the mustashe-god BTFO'd some 'ism'

Humans aren't special, humans aren't a telos, the human mind is the result of a natural process and has no privileged access to the Truth. The universe couldn't care less about us.

Yes, I think Nietzsche was the first person to fully try to come to terms with the Copernican revolution of Darwinism in terms of humanity's place in the universe. Unfortunately he too fell for the disease of humanism.

Don't remind me.

The only part of the universe that can care about anything is the human part which cares primarily about humans.

But that's wrong, user.

Reminder that they found evidence of Adam and Eve.

>materialism is here to stay!

Nothing is ever killed, pleb, just swept under the rug

You guys read Brassier's Nihil Unbound? Beneath the jargon, which is comical in its complexity, are a few interesting ideas about the possibilities of nihilism and the generally corrosive nature of thought to any forms of human value.

It is no fun to read at all but it's available online in pdf

>Reminder that-
go the fuck back to tumblr if you want to start a "discussion" with a presupposition that you're objectively correct then have a huge affirmation fest over it

Is he the speculative realist?

>Humans aren't special, humans aren't a telos, the human mind is the result of a natural process and has no privileged access to the Truth. The universe couldn't care less about us.
Humans are special precisely because the universe doesn't care - humans do care, and are unique in doing so. The universe may have no "meaning" in and of itself, but sentient beings can fill it with meaning.

Not all religion, metaphysics, or humanisms depend on that extremely specific conception of humanity

Why is filling the universe with meaning inherently a positive thing?

Let me know when any other animal goes to the moon without our help lmao

>implying we arent special

Ray Brassier's opinion on 'speculative realism':

The "speculative realist movement" exists only in the imaginations of a group of bloggers promoting an agenda for which I have no sympathy whatsoever: actor-network theory spiced with pan-psychist metaphysics and morsels of process philosophy. I don't believe the internet is an appropriate medium for serious philosophical debate; nor do I believe it is acceptable to try to concoct a philosophical movement online by using blogs to exploit the misguided enthusiasm of impressionable graduate students. I agree with Deleuze's remark that ultimately the most basic task of philosophy is to impede stupidity, so I see little philosophical merit in a "movement" whose most signal achievement thus far is to have generated an online orgy of stupidity.

Why does a thing have to be positive to be valid?

>killed all of metaphysics

You don´t know what you´re talking about user, go back at studying philosophy.

Darwinism literally is a metaphysical principle of nature you mongoloid sperg.

Reminder that material rationalism has yet to rationally explain matter despite it being literally state-sanctioned for centuries and until very recently given free reign to experiment with no boundaries of any kind.

>hurrr i'm a retard hurrrr

>science killed ontology

This is obviously false, ontology has made a pretty strong return in analytic philosophy for several decades, and it was never dead outside of it.

No one needed reminding of your condition

I dunno man the homocentrism is pretty strong with you

These days at least Scientism has more or less denied ontology and teleology categorically on the grounds of them being outside the testable scope of empiricism and the overall functional/descriptive purview of science. An explanation of matter isn't necessary to a philosophy that goes on a what-you-see-is-what-you-have-now-always-had-and-will-always-have basis for ascertaining reality, and assumes that there is no end or purpose that is not self-constructed, and that a working theory of mind based in some kind of computer science/neurology of the future will appear (lol inevitable completeness as an article of faith). Matter's self-evidence is enough ontology for a lot of people I think, and it gets to be confusing shit adding more steps to most people's intuitive reason. It's been pretty successful I guess.

So I guess if you say there's no game at all you don't have to play, everyone else is just some jackass with a ball out there.

the only thing homocentric is this post, because OP is a faggot

>Humans aren't special, humans aren't a telos, the human mind is the result of a natural process and has no privileged access to the Truth. The universe couldn't care less about us.

You don't think nature has some sort of purpose? Human consciousness emerged as a result of natural processes but mans capacity to transform nature, and potentially natures own fundamental laws, is simply natures highest stage of self-reflexion yet... both its cause and effect.

explain
are you talking about the chinese characters