Skip to main content

Philosophy

Philosophical influences

My influences are diverse, but a strong theme among them is biological and materialist realism, i.e. living according to nature, rather than ideology; recognising how you are influenced/determined, and how you can influence - yourself and others. I strongly reject political correctness, though I will inevitably cuck myself sometimes. I hope to make my own coherent philosophy of life from these influences and other experiences.
  • Aristotle - particularly biological metaphors of flourishing, and understanding of virtue and morality
  • Stoic - along the lines of Aristotle. Their philosophy complements Aristotle with more practicality and therapeutic use
  • Nietzsche - his critiques, especially in regard to nihilism and will to power are informative
  • Marx - his critique of Capitalism is powerful, although he was wrong about many things. I am not a Marxist, but some may confuse me for one because I attack economic fundamentalism and individualism. I am most interested in Marx's critique of ideology.
  • Existentialism - in my early days I was influenced by Existentialism as curated by Robert C. Solomon, who I owe a great deal of gratitude to. Existentialism first made philosophy relevant to me.

Philosophical recommendations

If I was to offer a practical philosophy course to others, I would suggest first the Existentialists, especially Nietzsche (via Robert C. Solomon), then the Stoics. The Existentialists are more about re-framing the mind toward a practical philosophy of life, whereas the Stoics actually provide an example of a philosophy of life, one which is quite naturalistic (if you cut out references to the Gods, which are unnecessary). In recommending the Stoics I would refer the reader to Aristotle for its deeper philosophical underpinnings.

In terms of epistemology, William James and Nietzsche are the way to go. Your idea of the truth must be practical, 'what works', not other airy-fairy notions. It should falsifiable (Popper) too and you should welcome and enjoy challenges to your beliefs but assert that challengers must make falsifiable claims. You should also be able to provide falsifiable claims/examples to back up your beliefs. If someone challenges you but is only talking out of their arse, feel free to reply with irony - this can be quite enjoyable.

For societal critique: Nietzsche, Sartre, Camus, Solzhenitsyn, Orwell, Huxley, Marx (on ideology only), Weber, Aristotle/Stoics. Avoid the fanciful idealism of Socrates/Plato.

You must be prepared to be completely politically incorrect if you really want to know the truth. That means you'll be labelled a racist/sexist/bigot, etc.You should treat these only as labels thrown out by the ignorant who are afraid of not conforming to herd morality.

Also, you need to create your own philosophy of life, not be a 'follower' of any of the above. They can and certainly will influence you, but you need to make a philosophy coherent to you, which can't be done just by reading other philosophers with no reference to your own context.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Multiculturalism is responsible for every war in history (almost)

people informally segregate all the time. You will find various ethnic enclaves in Melbourne and Sydney. Ethnocentric in-group preference is also seen in choice of friends and communication levels among work colleagues of different ethnic backgrounds. While there may be enough tolerance to allow semi-deracinated individuals to participate in capitalism and consumerism, the reality is that in-group preference is innate and Multiculturalism/diversity should be avoided a much as possible, because it breaks down social cohesion and trust. Diversity is our greatest weakness - an observable, scientific reality (footnote: Robert Putnam). Remember that forced integration has lead to many conflicts in the 20th and 21st century. WWI and Hitler would not have happened if various ethnic groups had sovereignty rather than being under the thumb of oppressive empires. Iraq and Israel/Palestine are two current examples of Multicultural conflicts. There is widespread revolt against forced integrati...
Post a Comment
Read more

How Liberalism enslaves

Aristotle, the Stoics and other ancient Greco-Roman moralists posit a very different idea of 'freedom' that involves combating the tendencies that divert us from human flourishing and contributing to our community as social animals. It is naturalistic, albeit pre-Darwinist, but it is not dogmatic like Liberalism, Leftism, etc. This ancient teach us what freedom really is, and Stoic practices in particular can inculcate an honest sense of autonomy. Liberalism claims to grant people autonomy but it only gives them a false sense of it. It effectively enslaves people to denial of their biology, hedonistic consumerism, keeping up with the Jones', seeking celebrity, lower quality social and family relations, workplace and other forms of alienation, pursuit of happiness in all the wrong places: career, travel, shiny things, sleeping around, taking drugs, etc. Liberalism won't necessarily lead to all these things, but it makes people vulnerable to their marketing, and being h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Equality, Liberalism and the Big State

Shelley makes Liberalism sounds as idealistic and Utopian as any religion. I even see some parallels with the Sermon on the Mount. What is the relation between 'equality' and the 'individual'. (I don't think we are equal and my reification of the 'individual' has become weaker lately). Must one have a strong view of equality to have a strong view of the individual and their 'rights'? I think so, although those regimes pushing equality the strongest - the Communists - have ended up being the most hierarchical and totalitarian of all, with the State on top and the plebs below. Equality ends ups sacrificing individual 'rights' for the sake of whatever new set of individual 'rights' are trendy at the time. e.g. we need to pretend that homosexual relationships are equal to heterosexual ones therefore our 'free speech' right is sacrificed so as to protect the new 'freedom from hurt feelings' right of another. New indiv...
Post a Comment
Read more