Imagine basing half of your life in a worldview and then you see some guy on KZread putting it on F tier

@pawegorka8589

Ай бұрын

In fact, half of the human population is below average, nothing to be ashamed of 😅

@Prabhu108.

Ай бұрын

Oh no. Anyways...

@bljrpaham

29 күн бұрын

HAHAHAHAHAHA

@Muneeb.266

29 күн бұрын

Does it matters

@MrBeas_Cousin

29 күн бұрын

@@bljrpahamTranslate to Englich

Putting Nihilist in D tier is a pro move. Only the true Nihilists (for which there are few) will accept it and be unbothered enough to interpret someone else’s well thought out opinion.

@MrBeas_Cousin

27 күн бұрын

by saying this you renounce any nihilistic worldview you may have had

@jonnygraham2372

27 күн бұрын

@@MrBeas_Cousin for which there are few. 🖤

@connerreeves3377

27 күн бұрын

false dichotomy

@connerreeves3377

27 күн бұрын

no-true-scotsman fallacy

@MrBeas_Cousin

27 күн бұрын

@@connerreeves3377 oh brother this guy stinks

Nihilism bottom tier and Absurdism top tier is just another way of saying you’re an optimist.

@Snook_YT

26 күн бұрын

Good point I guess so.

@tomdabahia

24 күн бұрын

Absurdism is a nihilism where you have fun along the way 🤷🏽‍♂️

@rebeccab1064

22 күн бұрын

Nihilism is ultimately a destructive lens to look at life with. Absurdism is an answer to the void.

@IFYOUWANTITGOGETIT

21 күн бұрын

Absurdism resonated with me immediately.

@es-hl7oc

21 күн бұрын

​@@Snook_YTit's literally not a good point though

philosophy tierlist is a hilarious concept, all for it

@dutchthenightmonkey3457

27 күн бұрын

only wish he did it in a little more of a deranged way, like his whole "I'm not gonna bash or attack any philosophy" almost made me click off at the beginning

@xiiir838

19 күн бұрын

​@@dutchthenightmonkey3457Hey bro, by any chance are you a person that leans ⬅️👈?

@brunorivest

4 күн бұрын

Exactly, that's what draw me in. It was a nice vid overall so I'm all for a part 2. Part 2 would also be interesting for the other traditions it could touch. In a part two, I'd definitely include pragmaticism. I think relativism would also be important to be included. Hedonism could also be interesting as a link between ancient philosophy and contemporary society.

@trevor9529

4 күн бұрын

​@@xiiir838 Brother, your comment made me curious so I looked at your channel and saved playlists. I understand your feelings and I sympathize with your frustrations. Liberalism is a disease, but the analysis that results in your viewpoint misses the mark. Your enemy is not the poor liberal, minority, or the queer kid. Your enemy is the elite class who profit off your body, and your labor. Engaging in identity politics drives a wedge between you and your neighbors and distracts you from this fact. I know times are bleak right now and the anger you feel blots out the depression. That is normal. We are all feeling this in some way due to the underlying contradictions in our society. I don't have all the answers but the catalyst that began clearing things up for me was the book "Native Son". I wish you well and if you want to talk more let me know :)

It sucks that modern nihilists just stop at the “life has no meaning” part, because Nietzsche’s teachings were for you to then create your own meaning after that point, and to be the controller of your own purpose in life. The truth was he was sort of a stoic, in that sense

@charlesprevost8501

14 күн бұрын

I really was even if stoic and Nietzsche disagree on a major point. Nietzsche believe you should live for your self, while stoic believe you should live for good(god). They in a sense have a similar way of seeing life

@charlesprevost8501

14 күн бұрын

And life problems, I really appreciate seing somebody saying that. Cause I have been thinking about that for a while and nobody seem to think like me ahah.

@t.b.cont.

14 күн бұрын

@@charlesprevost8501 I wouldn’t say stoics “live for god” at all. Stoicism predates Christianity by hundreds of years, and a majority of history’s greatest stoics were not Christian. The belief of stoicism is to make peace with what you can’t change for the better, and focus on what you can, which generally translates letting go of outside influences and focusing on bettering yourself.

@charlesprevost8501

14 күн бұрын

@@t.b.cont. you’re completely right. Still the greatest stoic were strong believers of Grec myth. Like Zeus etc. Also, yes Stoic did believe that outside influence should not change you for worse. This was just a part of their belief tho. Stoic thru this whole to not let the work change you did it to serve the world. Therefore, serve the good. And in their mind, the idea of good was said by gods*(religion). The stoic would therefore serve gods*. It’s a part you is usually forgotten today, as most modern Stoic are atheist. Still, the fondation of stoicism is intersected to religion(grec Myth).

@charlesprevost8501

13 күн бұрын

@@t.b.cont. *

I am an absurdist. I used to read books like I was going to find the answers, the German's, the French, the Russians, the Buddhists, the Jews etc etc. None of them were wrong but none of them were completely right. I realized there are no answers and no ones figured it out and that is ok. I just live my life, try to better, set goals, be charitable but if I fail at those things it's OK too.

@ripvanvinkle6881

Ай бұрын

Nothing is absolute. Thats what i live by

@Tshombee

28 күн бұрын

Hell yeah

@justusschoenmakers8987

27 күн бұрын

But you think absurdism is completely right? How is that not contradicting the whole of absurdism? Also how are you first naming people from certain countries and then suddenly religions? Your view: 'if i fail it also doesnt Matter' seems more nihilistic than absurdistic. Youre trying to cope with stress and depression via absurdism, it can help, but maybe read into it more, and if you already have, nice but keep the options open, you never know who is wrong or right...

@Paraselene_Tao

26 күн бұрын

​@@justusschoenmakers8987 Did OP say that absurdism is the one true answer or something? Is OP's statement, "I'm an absurdist," necessarily something that concludes all search for any more meaning? Can't absurdism easily overlap with a continued search, discovery, and invention of meaning? 😅

@Fastest.36Navy

25 күн бұрын

​​​@@ripvanvinkle6881So "Nothing is absolute" is apparently an absolute principle that you live by. I'm sure you can see the contradiction.

The problem with modern day philosophy is dogmatic beliefs. A Libertarian must believe that no government at all should exist or else they are not a true libertarian. Life is too nuanced for such hard line stances on philosophy. Sometimes things in life have no meaning, such as a baby dying at age 3 (nihilism), but you can still create beauty from this tragedy by appreciating the life you have, the small life they had, and this moment (romanticism). You should attempt to keep your emotions in check, not explode on someone who doesn’t deserve it (stoicism), but it is also ok if it’s too much to handle and you do something extreme like sob uncontrollably. Because the feeling itself is beauty (transcendentalism). Philosophers need to learn to compromise on philosophy and learn to not be so rigid. Else they end up in their current state of defending laughable opinions to the death

@Upsettingusername

Ай бұрын

Beliefs are rigid and hard to change. Ideas are meant to be maluable. People get ideas all the time all on their own where as what people believe often boils down to who people listen to, and what makes sense to them. Thing is fiction is only readable when it makes sense so people are often fooled, yet you have so many things that were once fanciful imaginations in scifi that are now reality. Actual philosphers really only reflect on themselves not so much society, more so how they view it at that time. Actual philosophers dont have rituals built into their philosophies although many of the currently reknowned ones used certain fungi to kickstart the process at times. Beliefs cause arguements that span thousands of years and lead to wars. Ideas bring conversations and other healthy interactions leading to prosperity. This is why political or religious philosophies and philosophers are sketchy, with actual philosphers trying their best to keep their personal beliefs and biases out of the equation entirely, because it narrows the field of thought leading to more focus on desires of heavenly nirvana and fear of the torments of not achieving such. Actually i had a seperate reason for the politcal part, but upon review i conclude my reply....

@checkmate716

Ай бұрын

This is something I have struggled with as I am a libertarian. I often see too many libertarians rely solely on deontology rather than consequentialism. As you said, life is nuanced!

@nerdcorner2680

Ай бұрын

@@checkmate716 Right! And to add onto this, I have a close friend who is a very active libertarian in politics and we debate it all the time. And my take away is always “with some tweaking of policies and agendas you guys should be sweeping every single election”. I think most people would flock to libertarian if you could pull back some of their ideas. Especially with how tired people are of right and left

@leoalphaproductions8642

Ай бұрын

Not all libertarians believe in 0 government. Some just think that government doesn’t need to interfere and try to fix every single problem in the world. Sometimes they’re just not qualified to fix some issues and should stick to their own fields and specific tasks within a society.

@checkmate716

Ай бұрын

@@nerdcorner2680 Yeah, the libertarian party needs to move away from the more "extremist" views. Focusing on practicality and little steps will allow the party to progress in a much more efficient manner!

Lessons of Philosophy 101: If you are going to make a comparison list, learn to distinguish between the fields of metaphysics, ethics and epistemology. In short, comparing empiricism and existentialism means I don't know anything about philosophy.

@Yusa_Beach

21 күн бұрын

I don't exactly know them either, care to summarize a distinguishment between them?

@HOVNA

21 күн бұрын

​@@Yusa_Beach Basically metaphysics is about lived reality, ethics about morality and epistemology about knowledge itself. If I'm not mistaken

@rehakmate

21 күн бұрын

This is a comment of someone that is well read on the subject.

@eltemmieincreiblementeaweo7872

21 күн бұрын

​@@Yusa_BeachEmpiricism its an epistemological branch that says (oversimplified) that true knowledge its possible only by experience. On the other side,existencialism its more focused on searching the meaning on life,what do we do with it and why. As you see, they cannot be compares as they try to answer different questions Its like trying to compare physics with psychology They just study different things

@evanfont913

20 күн бұрын

For me, it was the mispronunciation of many words that tells me his script has words he’s never used in real life. Tell me more about emfearicism my guy.

My problem with these philosophy channels is that they focus too much on identity and aesthetic rather than a philosophical movement and its significance. Everyone wants to say “I’m ___, I believe ___” rather than learning and deeply understanding the core foundations of these ideas. Ironically a Nietszche quote (F tier apparently) comes to mind typing this: “morals are inherently aesthetic”. Currently I see this channel and its viewers as engaging with the aesthetic of morality rather than its principle

@SimpPro101

19 күн бұрын

Whatever nerd

@hml25

17 күн бұрын

I don't think it's meant to be serious rather just a video for philosophy noob who could get interested and learn new things

@koowie_4188

17 күн бұрын

Nietzsche is an existencialist

@tweid8457

16 күн бұрын

Lectures exist

@mathiasprudhomme6495

14 күн бұрын

Now that you say it, yeah a lot

Utilitarianism isnt a philosophy about being happy at all times, or some happy-go-lucky philosophy. Its the idea that you should do your best to maximize happiness, although it does recognize that it’s not always 100% possible to keep everyone happy

@matthew-xf3zi

23 күн бұрын

Yeah, I was kind of taken aback by his statement on this. It's maximum good for most people. Think ozymandious. He killed millions of people to save billions. Neither outcome is preferred. It's the trolly problem when you take out any preference or bias you hold.

@meistermusic7168

23 күн бұрын

Yeah the Utilitarianism part of the video was really wrong :/

@steventolerhan5110

20 күн бұрын

Its also the belief that humans can predict the future

@dinninfreeman2014

20 күн бұрын

​@@steventolerhan5110to some extent forecasting the future is possible, though pretty limited and very challenging. The good judgement project does a pretty good job overall

@LB-nc2fp

19 күн бұрын

I think he means hedonism

Having every big word mispronounced was distracting at first, but it’s kind of nice to be reassured I’m not listening to AI.

@Paraselene_Tao

14 күн бұрын

😅 What if the AI were trained a bit to mispronounce words? I'm only kidding in this specific example (I'm pretty confident he's a real boy (Pinocchio reference)), but training an AI to mispronounce words could easily be done. Making it convincing would be a little harder, but with time & effort, almost anything is possible. We're nearing a time when & where anything online could be AI-genned. We're nearing a time when & where our smartphones or similar devices might carry powerful AIs on them that generate all the content we might ever need. Soon, gone might be the days of servers providing us most of our content. Instead, AI could generate in real-time more content than you and I could ever consume in our lifetimes. 😅 What an absurd future lies ahead of us. Something like the internet might exist for along time; however, instead of it being used as a highway for content as it is now, it might be better used to update all the many, smaller AIs that exist on smaller devices than the large servers that house Big AI. The Big AI will outdo humanity in math, science, and arts. It will update the smaller AIs via some kind of internet connection. The small AIs can provide us with evergreater math, science, arts, content, media, guidance, and so on. All of this is speculative, but it will be interesting to see how things play out in the next few decades. I tell folks over and over, "The 21st century will be the most absurd and surreal century of humanity ever." I'm grateful and excited to be alive during this time. So long as I live, I will get to observe some of the most absurd change in human history. A bit of apprehension though: will humanity be relevant in coming decades or centuries? 😅 If the ASI (s for super) outdoes humanity in math, science, art, and so on, then what do humans have to exist for? 😅 This is possibly the most absurd part of it to me: humans have made a future where we humans aren't needed anymore.

@PedroHenriquedeOliveiraC-iw9yd

10 күн бұрын

Just by the sheer size of this response...... my lord......I guess it fits on a video about philosophy

@102728

5 күн бұрын

​​@@Paraselene_Taois humanity relevant now? Is, besides the natural, already existing powers that are greater than ourselves, the one we create ourselves the one that makes us irrelevant?

@Paraselene_Tao

5 күн бұрын

@@102728 Yes, I see what you mean. In the scope of the universe, yeah, humanity barely existed. We're on one small rock orbiting a normal looking star, and that star orbits a normal galaxy with roughly 200 billion other stars, and that galaxy is one of roughly 200 billion galaxies in the observable universe, and the whole universe could be much larger than our observable bubble, and the observable bubble might be splitting into astronomically large numbers of universes in a Many Worlds model or it might all be existing in complicated superposition or something else comical. It's all laughably absurd: we barely exist(ed). Here on the little planet, though, we've had a fairly measurable effect. We have to consider it in relative terms. Did humanity affect the universe? Practically, no, we haven't. Did humanity affect the little planet we live on? Practically, yes, we have and continue to do so. We're living in the Anthropocene: different kinds of man-made pollution & evidence of humanity exist; CO2 & methane at almost unseen levels in hundreds of thousands of years or possibly millions of years are causing global climate change; microplastics and "forever" chemicals everywhere; nearly all surface of Earth has been touched by mankind except maybe portions of Antarctica; we're the only known species to make it (however briefly, and some people consider it a conspiracy) to the Earth's moon; we're the only species on this planet to split and fuse atoms (fission did happen naturally in Oklo, Gabon, and a few other places, but we've made a real point of making isotopes beyond 92 on the periodic table); biodiversity is crashing downwards at rates probably never seen outside mass extinction events; nearly all megafauna alive these days is food or work animals for us; massive swaths of land are monocultures; deforestation and urbanization is perfectly visible from satellite view; and there are more examples that I'm probably missing. 😅 So yeah, we're irrelevant to the universe, but we're kind of relevant to the Earth. Meanwhile, AI might be an intelligent tool that humanity makes that ends up making humanity irrelevant (back to default irrelevancy) on Earth. 😅 This is probably the most absurd part of it to me: we might close the loop of our relevancy soon. That we were relevant at all, that we did cause the Anthropocene extinction/calamity event on Earth, and that we might fix the problem ourselves by giving balanced control over to our ASI systems. Maybe everything returns to normal: humanity never was relevant to the universe. Have I made sense? I hope you have a good day.

So absurdism is basically just nihilism without the meaningless part.. like there's no universal meaning but we can create our own meaning by embracing the absurdity of life and just moving on.

@idontwant2beasoldiermama241

17 күн бұрын

Yes, like the joker. Existentialism is the healthier path tho.

@DogEye69

16 күн бұрын

@ServingSoul In the big picture, it is. But if you can bring the belief of meaning to either yourself or others, that meaning is a thing and it is meaningful.

@DogEye69

16 күн бұрын

@ServingSoul Isn't it natural to yearn for meaning? Otherwise I would just decide to end myself immediately on the spot instead of suffering for absolutely no reason.

@DogEye69

16 күн бұрын

@ServingSoul And how is monotheism also not a form of cope? You'd be putting your faith in something that might not be true as opposed to finding meaning in accepting that there might be no universal meaning and just setting your own purpose.

@DogEye69

16 күн бұрын

@ServingSoul How do you know that independent is an entity like god? And what if we are insignificant to that god? There could be many other possibilities and nothing can be said for certain so I'd say it's all ultimately a meaningless struggle. And by creating my own meaning, I meant setting a purpose for the time I'm here if there is no universal purpose instead of giving in to nihilism and just ending myself. Like I said in my original comment, it's basically just nihilism without the meaningless part or rather without accepting the meaningless part.

I generally avoid calling out mispronunciations, but your René Descartes was pretty epic.

@cdogthehedgehog6923

Ай бұрын

Oooooo i cant wait to hear it Edit: dammit i mustve missed it. Do you have approx timestamp?

@magistral5732

Ай бұрын

​@@cdogthehedgehog692318:35

@magistral5732

Ай бұрын

Leibniz too is pretty butchered

@Soraile

27 күн бұрын

Laissez-faire was also brutal

@danielwiebe2123

25 күн бұрын

Emfearicisms

no way, bro really needs to chill with that uploading schedule. I havent gotten time to go through last video and he got one up already. Sick content man keep it up

@jonnycounts1824

Ай бұрын

So you sitting on my face right?

@jrodd13

Ай бұрын

Fr, mans is on the content GRIND

@jacobschroeder5615

23 күн бұрын

He’s not working too hard, lots of Chat GPT here.

@lunarknight3597

22 күн бұрын

​@@jacobschroeder5615 how?

@wissamacaron

18 күн бұрын

@@jacobschroeder5615 Fr, I could very easily hear that

00:40 I’m just going to try to give and objective opinion”… The irony of this statement is very funny.

@bluezonertb4139

16 күн бұрын

Isn't he literally making a tier list about philosophy? how would he even be objective about it?

@halqthedarktemplar

15 күн бұрын

It's very clear he has no idea what he is talking about

@kalebmorgan4834

14 күн бұрын

A guy who says this has no clue on how to make a philosophy tier list

@torelarsenn

13 күн бұрын

Yeah, he should just be objective enough to admit its a subjective basis to his list.

Your production has gotten way more upscale. I like the old and new content of you dawg keep it up

To say that determinism has little evidence for is a bit bias to say no? While no one claim proves determinism, many united fields such as neurological, psychological, sociological, genes to environment and many more would support determinism. Moreover, there is no consensus to define free will making me believe that it exists out of appeal to intuition

@landenmoudy5749

29 күн бұрын

Its all subjective.

@cornet468

27 күн бұрын

definetely

@cornet468

27 күн бұрын

​@@landenmoudy5749I recommend Sapolsky's works as foundation for a determinist mind and the inexistence of free will or agency.

@THESHOWBOAT

26 күн бұрын

It doesn't matter if free will exists or not, it doesn't make a difference

@linuxramblingproductions8554

26 күн бұрын

Yeah i find that weird free will has always been a wishy washy concept and everything we can find supports a more deterministic view

Don't ask for a nihilism based perspective. It doesn't matter.

objectivism in A tier is just crazy

@azmodanpc

20 күн бұрын

Ayn Rand fanboy

@jeba6549

20 күн бұрын

Its incredibly clear he just read the wiki page for it and heard "freedom" thought it sounded good and put it in a because of that

@Console-l0gger

19 күн бұрын

Subjectivism is so much better, one could argue that subjectivism even has objectivism in mind

@xiiir838

19 күн бұрын

Let me guess: you're a ⬅️👈 wing person, aren't you?

@lunarfox7265

17 күн бұрын

Yeah i can't take a channel that puts objectivism in A tier seriously. Like how do you have a video ranking philosophies and then put one of the worst and most harmful ones in A tier 💀

Great video! It was a little like when you ask ChatGPT to tell you about philosophies but with better writing and I love the tier format because I get to hear your opinion which I liked and ended up following your channel because I resonated with your view points, mostly!

Absurdism and vintriliquism

@13aware

8 күн бұрын

Experience Meaningless: Experience and prejudice. To accept sight and illusion in the same relativity and not be a slave. Slavery: To be free from the growth of intellect. Experience free from understanding and memory as triviality. Memory: reduced down to recollection without review, in a universe of consistent physics; a triviality of organic invincibility. Experience rendered down to self-sensual recall without existential considerations; meaningless. Prejudice: to accept the delusion that no human can consider and choose. For experience to outweigh sense and sensible prudence and suggest in definite physicality that humanity is as inorganic as the constructs we purpose. Triviality to the concept of Slave, is Mass to Gravity, either one hypothetical without the physics of Trivialization or Mass. One requiring the circumstance of genesis, the other requiring absence of necessity; Nativitus Ancillae. Relativity: the universe revolves around you, but only if you watch with others; relativity born of tripartite geometry; self (observing), other (conferring), objective (occurring): co-intimate experience and co-context. Relativity: all things can happen to you, most didn't, you only know what you think, you only think what you can hypothesize, all understanding revolves around perception and interaction. Understanding and position; relative. Hypothesis: a proposition of a form unsensed in the physical, in the definition "scientific" it is the Fructus Ventris Physica Quantitatis; the guessable, potent in measurability, invisibilia ad carnalis, observationis codificationem. Hypothesis: a concept just beyond sensible observation but within sensory or facultative relativity to intimate comprehension; the space an observer feels safe to coniectura didicit doctrina. A cerebrum exercitium. Meaningless: the words of any personal exposition without the person. Interpretation of intended and intimate communication removed from its physical occurrence. To hypothesize in the spirit of Freud, all are I. Meaningless: a description of a building behind it's façade to a man on the street. Definition without sensible example; invisibility bestowed by the suggestibility of the potent potentiality of descriptionem alienum. Reference without experience, definition without context, experience without definition, definition without reference; to theorize on fancy, the possibilities of cause bereft of "scientific" prejudice towards provable. A description of the unseen to the comfortable in sense, and sensibility; hypothesis delivered socially by the perfecte mediocris to their perfecte mediocris aetatis. Interest and applause humilis, the sermo aequalis. Contemporary communication, external warehouse for internal deliberation. Deliberatio externa by contrast is built on extra-contemporary, the functional in sense and nerve unwilling to mal-hypothesize popularis prudentia. By definition a contemporary is both naturally occurring and actively intersecting, or it is a generational (illusory), built of temporal coincidence. Meaningless in contemporations intimate, capable of saying they share an age. The addict kind Lonliness is a myth spread by the ill, unwelled by popular delusion (self accepted). The sickly, pulsing out their (self) comforting radiance, the marking of a predators territory. A light to shine on all slow enough to not revile it for it's false and reason less eviction of self from capability. The prey; uninitiated youth, vulnerable innocence. Argue not with the aged (or experienced) self-convinced. The miracle of emotional conformation of physical fact convincing to the unknowing, under steady application, overly sweetened (for the self) ideals of pleasure and comfort, the prey forget they knew a peace that didn't requiring feeding or explanation. The virtue of falsely buoyed stability grinding the ignorant, young, and uncatered, all taken in by the sin of kindness as apex. To gift the sickness that tells a human "human emotion in the negative is unnecessary and beyond comprehension or tolerance". To know that there are those in the world of humanity, who in their generationally refined adherence to parasite coddling, will continue to teach the youth "drugs are a healthy and functional right of aware and intelligent people" is a mark of shame in this age of our collective development. The truth of human being betrayed by the proposed necessity of stimulation beyond the natural state, it's supposed normality vouchsafed; sobriety (health) ignored as a greater insanity than parasitism. Salve the wounded pride of the vulgar addict, crucify the outspoken advocate of reassessment. This is not a statement of conflict, rather a portrait of the true and natural order in it's biased equality (comfort belonging to those who crave it most). Exogeny In an era of fear, humanity is tested. The exodus of existential loneliness is a heavy burden. Self-indulgent contemporary values, the pitiful death of the faithful gregarious martyr. Silenced in the passion of virtue, in the fury of desire as necessity, the ideal dies for the joy of man as the ideal devotee of nothing. Endogenous evidence of exogenous truth, derived from noble prejudiced purposes, refutes the pathologies of nature as the folly of prosaic and sensible sustainability. Euphoria at any cost, at any cost.

Idk, I feel like nihilism is a very healthy state of mind for anxious people. Normal people will go "nothing matters :(" while anxious people will go "nothing matters! :D" and actually feel free to work on the same things normal people feel the need of an external value of existence to work on.

@tubsy.

24 күн бұрын

No, if you genuinely acted out Nihilism and thought about it during every single interaction you ever have you will become depressed. That's just inevitable. What you're doing is pretending like life is meaningful when it fits you to gain positive emotions, but only accept meaninglesness when it's about philosophizing.

@chukyuniqul

24 күн бұрын

@@tubsy. all I hear is a lot of whinging from someone who is upsetti spaghetti 😘

@tubsy.

24 күн бұрын

All I see is intellectual dishonesty ​@@chukyuniqul

@chukyuniqul

24 күн бұрын

@@tubsy. could be. or maybe I'm different from you and can accept the inherent meaninglessness in life and see it as conferring my choices their own special meaning.

@BenRover2961

21 күн бұрын

​@@tubsy. OP's point is probably nihilism through thought. Not everybody goes straight to depression when you expect less through a basis of a reality check, this might be a solution to anxiety and overthinking. What you're talking about is nihilism through action, which is dangerous because it may affect other people. Nihilism always factors in realism which basically counters social rules created for everyone to obey. The only extreme side of it is it can be used to force anyone into anarchy which is ironic since it now has a "meaning" when taken into action.

This video is kind of funny because a lot of these philosophies overlap in profound ways. It's unlikely that someome could hold all of these philosophies at the same, but many overlap in significant manners.

Enjoyed the vid, subscribed and looking forward to more like this!

my favorite philosophical approach is pulling bits and pieces of all of them together to create a logically inconsistent amalgamation

The ranking of Absurdism and nihilism is ridiculous , you cannot be taken seriously with this man , and saying nihilism is about despair is even worse . Really hope people won't take this video seriously.

@nitaigur6990

17 күн бұрын

Funny, it seems like you’re taking it very seriously

@nitaigur6990

17 күн бұрын

From my point of view, absurdism is just the inevitable conclusion of nihilism. If nothing matters then you are free to decide what matters to you. Your belief in meaning *is* meaning because the only thing that shapes your world is the way you see it. If you believe in something that something is as true as it gets, and it doesn’t matter if it isn’t because nothing matters right?

@srpedrusko2645

17 күн бұрын

​you start creating your own veliefs after nihilism, absurdism is not the only way​, it is just a fresh boot to start over@@nitaigur6990

@DyneTreal

16 күн бұрын

​@@nitaigur6990No, Existentialism is the natural conclusion of Nihilism. Absurdism is the result of seeing Nihilism and descending into madness to cope and use meaningless to achieve happiness. However; Existentialists, or Active Nihilists, further employ philosophy to defeat the meaninglessness of Nihilism by creating meaning for themselves and with the aid of others, often employing principles from other forms of philosophy to establish even truer morality.

@nitaigur6990

16 күн бұрын

Yeah I agree I kinda forgot about existentialism but I think it’s more similar to my conclusion than absurdism

Yea dude it was an amazing tierlist it was great would be great to see more like this n the future. Much love from greece!!

this somehow appeared on my recomended list and I pretty much enjoyed, great content, keep it up!

im something between absudism and acid communism

@mw9688

Ай бұрын

@@Ex-memegoditanah… we are all the same… melted together… swallowed in a cosmos in an ever present embrace that we call existence.

@aloha6758

Ай бұрын

@@Ex-memegodita beyond definition

@chrisakane9840

Ай бұрын

Can't go wrong with plagiarism! 😉

@silencemover

29 күн бұрын

are you somehow between stupid and dumb also?

@shroomlord682

25 күн бұрын

@@Ex-memegodita communism but we all do lsd

Oh shit, I fancy determinism. Damn it, I wish I could choose otherwise.

@tweid8457

13 күн бұрын

Determinism is connected to materialism, do u want to be idealist?

@placeholder3863

12 күн бұрын

@@tweid8457 what are you on about?

@tweid8457

12 күн бұрын

@@placeholder3863 For me Determinism is true, because of dialetics. Dialetics is a materialistic view on world, because even though there was idealistic dialetics (Hegel), it came from evolution of philosophy,it will be objective idealism. Idealism divides onto 2 main things (u can combine them) : Subjective, Objective Idealistic subjectivism is a philosophical perspective that combines elements of idealism and subjectivism. It posits that the only reality that exists is the mental or subjective experience of individuals. According to this view, the world is not an objective, independent reality, but rather a creation of the mind.Example : rose becomes red whne we look on it Objective : there is an ideal spirit/god/world etc. while our world is existing because of that thing.Hegel had an idea of objective idealism, where a spirit evolved to get knowledge about itself (very short explanation). 🤗

@placeholder3863

11 күн бұрын

@@tweid8457 interesting

I find it interesting that upon my own independent ponderings that I came up with the same thoughts as some of these philosophers did a long time ago. I'm glad that I came across your video that I can finally classify the schools of philosophies I subscribe to. I'm well aware of stoicism and that I subscribe to it for some time now but I also learned that I'm a nihilist, empiricist, and a rationalist.

Definitely didn’t think I was going to watch the whole thing but better I am. Lol good video man props. I live by stoicism myself, love and wisdom to you my brother.

Personally, I think if you’re a man in today’s modern world, stoicism is objectively the best philosophy to adopt. Be like Geralt, Chief, Ghost, Marston, Kratos. Accept the absolute dawg inside of yourself and learn to control that beast and to channel that energy into your art or work or both.

@hml25

17 күн бұрын

Today man's are hiding rather than controlling their emotion women will cry feel better and learn men will hide everything until they explode or will transform it to anger

@jacklikescereal4312

14 күн бұрын

That is so fuckin stupid. In today’s modern society any man should be able to adopt any philosophy they desire. Stoicism is corny and just another way of acting like a “ s i g m a “

@LartinBeats-rg6pf

7 күн бұрын

Agreed, even things like absurdism are based on feelings, the feeling "well man, life it's kinda crazy", that's why absurdism, leaves to some general good feeling ideology. On the other hand Stoicism recognises the value of the human, and that we loose are temper and can be quite irrational at times, but controlling oneself, knowing every extension of your being, that's why more loving and virtuos than any popular philosophical ideology

@Zero-zr6xx

5 күн бұрын

True but don't forget that Stoicism is also based on feelings, what makes it special is it teaches self-improvement and control over your own emotions compared to other philosophies/ideologies who are too busy trying to find answers to the questions provided by nihilism.

I’m an nihilist-absurdist. But before all that, I am a contextualist. Everything within context.

@j.s.ospina9861

26 күн бұрын

"I'm a nihilist-absurdist. But before all that, I am." -OmeganKryist, an existencialist.

@Wulk

26 күн бұрын

Isn't being a Nihilist-Absurdist just an absurdist?

@OmeganKryist

26 күн бұрын

@@Wulk pretty much yeah. It’s mostly to say I am on the fence between both and don’t make that big of a distinction between them. I am not an existentialist though purely through me being a determinist on the same grounds that I am an atheist (essentially I see it as the non position, agnostic with lower burden to assume such doesn’t exist).

@Paraselene_Tao

26 күн бұрын

Your use of the word "contextualist" is interesting. I guess it translates to "constructivist" in my personal lexicon, but you might name it contextualist as you like. 😅 I really like George Kelly's Personal Construct Theory, but hardly anyone talks about him. His work helped lead to Cognitive Behavioral Theory. Basically, humans are scientists who constantly think and perceive the world through mental constructs. Mental constructs are pseudo-dichotomous spectrums that describe a thing: good-bad, light-dark, happy-sad, interested-bored, and any other mental construct. People build worldviews with these mental constructs. We're constantly experimenting: we test the usefulness of our constructs against the real world. It's possible to develop new and useful mental constructs throughout life. Also, we can borrow mental constructs from other people and keep them I'm our minds. Overall, I like Personal Construct Theory a lot, but hardly anyone talks about it. To me, a responsible person is one who recognizes what mental constructs they're using, what mental constructs other folks use, and finally how do we help make these worldviews made of mental constructs work together in a harmonious manner. 😅

@OmeganKryist

26 күн бұрын

@@Paraselene_Tao Yeah suppose that is somewhat similar to what I refer to as contextualism, least adjacent to what I mean. I sum it up as thus: “It’s a rejection of absolutes. It is to say that objectivity is not an inherent property of things, but rather a property derived from the relationship between things.” It’s related to relativism, but with the intent to have a foundation to which we can understand things in a concrete or objective manner.

I really enjoyed this video, thanks, it would be great a part 2; I just started learning philosophy, starting with Stoicism, I guess I’m in a good lane

Yes yes, part 2 I want. Your tier list is very similar to mine. I love Stoicism and also The Way of Tao, also a bit of Absurdism and cynism. This are the ones that work for my personal philosophy.

Id love it if you included some eastern philosophies if you were to do this again, like buddhism, taoism, confucianism etc. could at an interesting twist to the video and introduce people to a different aspect of philosophy

@Nobody_247

28 күн бұрын

Buddhism isn't fully east asian btw It is technically Indian, as it originated there, but the Chinese added a lot to it

@JonTonyJim

28 күн бұрын

@@Nobody_247 would indian philosophies not count as eastern? How would you categorise them?

@Nobody_247

28 күн бұрын

@@JonTonyJim The term “Eastern Philosophy” is usually used for Chinese and other East Asian countries such as Japan and South East Asia. But if we talk about the outside perspective, I guess India is considered Eastern as well.

@AwakenZen

8 күн бұрын

Just replace eastern with Asian so Mr perfect won't get so mad smh lol

Moral Nihilism HAS MADE ME SO HAPPY I CAN PUT MY OWN MEANING TO THINGS AND HAS MADE ME STOP FEELING BAD ABOUT THINGS OR GUILT BECAUSE GOOD AND BAD DONT EXIST

@SimoneGermani04

18 күн бұрын

Good and bad don't exist?? How? Explain to me, I'm very curious

@zryzenzzzz

17 күн бұрын

@@SimoneGermani04 . Once I stopped I lost all feelings of guilt and empathy and shame it has made life way better I don’t feel bad about a thing! Good and bad don’t exist they are just terms that humans and religion made to control us. The only true law is the law of nature. What you view as good or evil is based solely upon your own perception. What you view as evil, someone else may view as good. These concepts are purely human and cannot be observed in nature. Good and evil do not actually exist. And at a microscopic level everything is made out of particles in life and there are no good particles or bad ones they are just particles moving around. So weather you kill or steal it’s all fundamentally the same thing it’s all just particles moving around. And this goes much more deeper and it explains a lot in life and even after life. EDIT: Some people are saying since I don’t believe in good or bad I’m okay with getting beat up and won’t view it as bad, but that’s a dumb way to look at it since good and bad don’t exist it can’t be good or bad but the only true terms is wanted or unwanted to that specific person. The person causing harm may view it as wanted to them but the victim may view it as unwanted but that does not mean it’s objectively “good” or “bad

@aeolianthecomposer

17 күн бұрын

​@@SimoneGermani04The sense of morality is entirely subjective and unique to each individual human. There's no greater meaning to it, therefore it is of no more importance than the taste in food or clothing

@James-eh4ye

16 күн бұрын

Thousands of years of intelligent humans debating and experimenting makes a pretty strong set of societal morals. There’s obviously things that can be better and will eventually get there but if you do things without thought just because it doesn’t really matter you will run into problems. Like the reason you feel guilt is because humans evolved to work together to survive and if you do something that hurts the tribe you will hurt yourself in the process.

@zryzenzzzz

16 күн бұрын

@@James-eh4ye I’m not saying that it’s a bad thing that they are made up I’m just saying good and bad don’t exist that’s a fact but it’s good for growth in a society, I’m just not pulled against the same moral constraints as everyone else

the algorithm did its work and now i am subbed

I ALWAYS thumb up these kinds of videos. My philosophy and viewpoint are always a bit different. But I always respect people, who really think about these things from their own viewpoint. RESPECT!

putting objectivism over utilitarianism is actually wild

@EmmaHopman

27 күн бұрын

That was my reaction too. No way is justification of selfishness a better idea than utility perfectionism.

@kepler_22b83

25 күн бұрын

​@@EmmaHopman Ask that to any american president... for them, socialists are enemies of the world. They preach individual and capital. Utilitarianism just didn't work out, it is an ideal picture that was disgraced and disrespected by millions. And now, a society build uppon the good of the collective has to tear down the capitalists bastion to build a new. You can't force everyone to colaborate, and there will always be a selfish b* that will work against the benefits of all. For us who live this life, getting there will make our world a dystopia in the process... Ideals have no practicality, at least for now.

@jeba6549

20 күн бұрын

He clearly just doesnt understand what either of them are

I believe nihilism is underrated because due to incorrectly defined, nihilism is great

@DARK-tl8vg

17 күн бұрын

​@fabianvoigtlander1042 😊🎉 ever heard of moksha , moksha is your goal. try it

@andrewunthank3521

16 күн бұрын

So that’s the correct definition?

@ricky.t.1658

14 күн бұрын

No, it isn’t, seek help

@user-el8bp1gj2m

14 күн бұрын

@@ricky.t.1658 but you are the one who needs help and not aware of evidence, its like you are punshing me for no reason and claim i attacked you, and whats my option

@Zero-zr6xx

5 күн бұрын

Nihilism as a standalone is not great, it's more of a foundation belief and most people go through Nihilism atleast once in their life but it never lasts cause it alone will 100% lead to a destructive path that disregards life itself, There are 2 ways to go through Nihilism, 1st one roots from optimism, both Existentialism and Absurdism, they are the healthy conclusion of nihilism where both still believe life is inherently meaningless but Existentialism argues to create the meaning for yourself while Absurdism offers you to "give up" the pursuit of trying to find rational meaning in a irrational meaningless universe, 2nd one is the other end of Nihilism is which pure negativity, pessimism and slothful, it's conclusion is either suicide or living life by not "living". It's as the point where people think "nothing matters anymore, why should I do anything?" which is basically the extreme end of nihilism.

I love a second philosophy tier list. Also would like to see dialetics placed.

I love this type of videos you make the Videos great

Stoicism and Absurdism>>>>>>>> others philosophys.

Until watching this video i didnt know what to call it, but now i can say have a pretty nihilistic view on life and I've always felt very freed because of it. Believing there is no set meaning of life means that I can create my own meaning to my life. It's not about whats expected of me or searching for meaning, but more about how I choose to live my short little life on this floating rock. I've never understood how there even could be a meaning to being alive, we're just here and all we can do it make the best of it

@GueroTonka

Ай бұрын

You are referring to existentialism, that's when you realize life has meaning and you must create your own meaning. Nihilist believe there is no meaning and it cannot be create because life is inherently meaningless

@justusschoenmakers8987

27 күн бұрын

That pretty not nihilistic and basically exactly what existentialism is! 'A nihilist believes that life is meaningless and the only known truth is the existence of the self. An existentialist believes that life is meaningless too, but that meaning can be created by the individual'. Visit the existentialism subreddit if you want to learn more.

@tubsy.

24 күн бұрын

When you come home you will treat your children, your spouse and family as if they were meaningful. In other words, you'll only be a Nihilist when you have to philosophize, but will act out the opposite. You'll only acknowledge Nihilism when it fits you.

Nice video! Just one correction regarding Objectivism: Objectivist ethics is in fact pro selfishness and does not consider selfishness natural in the sense that "everyone is inherently selfish". To objectivism being selfish would mean rationally thinking about your goals and values in order to act upon your best interest, so people who evade thinking and acting upon their long term goals and passions either via drugs, whimsical pleasures and nihilism would not be considered self interested.

All of these philosophies are great, providing valuable insights and perspectives. Camus is probably my favourite, along with Marcus Aurelius and Diogenes (guilty pleasure). Ideally, we cherry-pick the good parts out of each. As with anything, all of these philosophies can be overdone if focused on exclusively, leading to worse outcomes than not philosophising at all.

Absurdisim is a Nihilism DLC change my mind

@Radioactivepaladin0703

13 күн бұрын

Aka optimistic nihilism.

@Zero-zr6xx

5 күн бұрын

It's basically the neutral DLC ending we get, existentialism is the good ending, and pure nihilism is the bad ending

Saying this isn’t biased is crazy

@GloryBlazer

15 күн бұрын

Wait he said that ? Probably a joke hopefully

thanks for the new video snooky i thought you edited the video not a editor .waaay better editing

I enjoyed the video, great insights and i agree with the list. Earned a subscription from me 👍

Putting nihilism in bottom tier, you were real for that

YOOOO NEW CONTENT?!?!?! COMMON SNOOK WWWWW

You should probably divide phylosophical theories in the subjects they study. Like,for example,ethic,then other for esthetic, other for epistemology. Because some theories cannot be compares as they are not in any way similar to the subject they study or the questions they try to answer.

I think basing each one on a tier list is inherently a largely opinionated base in and of itself. You can argue that one is basically rating it on a scale on wether they can fully understand the context of the philosophy, their grasp and understanding, and if they truly can weild it in their mind. Albeit, I would like to believe most of these people know this and they're just curious on your personal opinions. Much love! Very interesting to see your opinion.

I'd generally agree with this list, I tend to look at things through absurdist or stoic lenses while valuing rationalist and existentialist principles, and nihilism as a philosophy is worthy of being clowned on. Most others are fine, I guess, except determinism should be D tier. Not only is it impossible to validate one way or another, it literally doesn't matter one way or another. If it's true, it changes nothing, if it's not, then it's not worth taking into consideration.

@lemurluver12

28 күн бұрын

“determined” by Robert Sapolsky might open your mind to the idea!

@linuxramblingproductions8554

26 күн бұрын

It has evidence like most almost all things we can find having traceable causes and thus in a sense being determined to have happened because of those causes.

@kafkaesque5943

26 күн бұрын

Why is nihilism worthy of being clowned on?

@kingofAwsomness

26 күн бұрын

@@kafkaesque5943 I'm guessing he thinks all nihilists are the frowning friends.

@GeorgRv22

13 күн бұрын

@@kafkaesque5943Because it’s one of the main reasons that society is so messed up nowadays.

Pretty good video, but man the prunonciation of french words and names is balls to the walls crazy.

I’m an absurdist to the core. Every insane random event can be seen as a Seinfeld bit if you view life as absurd. Life is went to be witness and experienced in all its insane glory. It will throw seemingly random encounters at you and you might aswell laugh at it then be depressed by the lack of control.

Great video. If you’re interested in absurdism and haven’t read The Fall by Albert Camus, I recommend you pick it up. I’m currently reading this book for the second time. It’s deeply satisfying and completely changed my perspective on life after my first read. Keep it up, you’ve earned my subscription.

Determinism doesn't have a lot of evidence?!?!?! Like all of Physics, Biology and Neurobiology?

@ricky.t.1658

14 күн бұрын

Show me an scientific article that proves (with the scientific method) determinism is true

@JosephThompson-cn6sn

9 күн бұрын

​@ricky.t.1658 I usually don't enjoy being pedantic, but your comment comes across so combative that I feel obligated to make this reply. Firstly, when you say "scientific article," what exactly are you asking for? What is your standard of evidence? Are you looking for a scientific theory or law? Secondly, in the scientific method, nothing "proves" anything true. By saying that, you've demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of the scientific method. There is no single piece of information that "proves" anything in science. It can only serve as evidence of a described phenomenon. You come across as incredibly bad faith, and honestly, even if there existed scientific evidence to back up his claim, im not inclined to believe you'd accept it.

@ricky.t.1658

9 күн бұрын

@@JosephThompson-cn6sn this is the best thing you had to say against my argument? Xd Ok, show scientific evidence that uses the scientific method to get a conclusion that suggests determinism is true

@JosephThompson-cn6sn

9 күн бұрын

@ricky.t.1658 I wasn't making an argument, and, continuing with the theme of misusing terms, [in this case "argument"] neither were you. You continue to appear combative. Edit: it's also funny that in your new, revised comment, you still demonstrate a misunderstanding of the scientific method. Science is used to explain specific, empirical phenomena. When you say, "Find scientific evidence that suggests determinism is true," that premise wouldn't be found within a scientific hypothesis. A scientific approach would seek to establish an explanation for a specific phenomenon. It starts and stops there. It's impartial to determinism. Other people could then propose that explanation and phenomena as evidence of the existence of determinism, but the standard you've set is unreasonable and unscientific.

@ricky.t.1658

7 күн бұрын

@@JosephThompson-cn6sn therefore, as you said, science does not prove determinism, as the original comment claims it does

In my opinion your philosophy in any given moment should be flexible, whatever serves your purpose at any given time. Some philosophies can do that at any time, but a lot cannot. Rather than Binary-thinking, combining multiple aspects of several philosophies to fit whatever serves your purpose is objectively superior. Rather than Black or White, combine the best aspects of the two and take the Gray route. After a bit of research I believe I'm just describing Syncretism, correct me if that's wrong. (I'm not very philosophical so please bash me in the comments for denouncing your views)

@aerience

22 күн бұрын

i also am not very philosophical, i'm here just to say that i agree

@Zero-zr6xx

5 күн бұрын

Finally someone who also thought of this idea, it's been on my head multiple times where people should just take the best ideas and lessons each philosophy gives and compile them into your own philosophy, that way you can fully adapt and become the best version of yourself.

I don't know any of these and I haven't watched yet, but before I get influenced more on another's viewpoint and sing along, I think it's safe to say that every person doesn't need to inherently have one philosophy, heck one may even have contrasting ones. We are very confusing creatures and it just means we have to find balance of what we think and how we view life, optimistic or pessimistic.

@NixtySign

3 күн бұрын

my view is pretty commonpoint and I'm glad to see comments talk about this stuff more in depth, rad content.

Great idea for a video. So interesting!

Disliking straight away because i follower haterism

Im giving this guy a pass cause he doesn't seem to be a philosophy channel. He lumped Nietzsche in with the nihilists when Nietzsche was a hug vritic of nihilism and warned about the dangers of it. Nietzsche is an exesentialist and his contribution alone would have catapulted that philosophy to the top of S-tier. Im guessing this guy read the Wikipedia page regarding each philosophy amd made the list that way. Because there's no way someone who has read Nietzsche would put him in with his sworn enemies the nihilists. Furthermore, Nietzsche was a student of the stoics and reveered them. Finally Nietzsche's contributions of "the will to power" shits on anything Albert camus has ever created. Absurdism belongs in F tier as it doesn't give you a model or framework to under expect the "image Sisyphus happy".

@nomad134

25 күн бұрын

Shit it really hurts you?

@tylers9006

24 күн бұрын

Yes lol that’s exactly what I was thinking. I mean I don’t this Camus is that bad but no S tier- he’s a very good and accessible intro into the early 20th century ideas. You are right that the myth of Sisyphus is a diluted Ubermench. Nietzsche easily rains supreme. Nietszche’s influence isn’t even just limited to existentialism and I kinda hate putting that label on him too. Simone De Bouvier (kinda how to spell it) and Judith Butler have all contributed to the advancement of feminism based on Nietszche’s philosophy. Foucault and Derrida have interpreted Nietszche into post-structural ideas. Deleuze even interpreted his work as a metaphysician for the ideas of Becoming and Force. My problem with these philosophy channels is that they focus too much on identity and aesthetic rather than a philosophical movement and its significance. Everyone wants to say “I’m ___, I believe ___” rather than learning and deeply understanding the core foundations of these ideas. Ironically a Nietszche quote comes to mind typing this: “morals are inherently aesthetic”. Currently I see this channel and its viewers as engaging with the aesthetic of morality rather than its principle

@dankconspiracy6362

24 күн бұрын

​@@tylers9006 I agree but I think it's pretty clear that this isn't really a philosophy channel, I don't think he has a background in philosophy or is well-read at least

@tubsy.

24 күн бұрын

He also put Kierkegaard there who was a literal Christian

@heine1717

19 күн бұрын

A big part of Camus’ La Peste is the maxim «Be decent», which you can use as a basis for a worldview. Otherwise i agree

thanks for making a video essay type channel about philosophy that isn’t using AI narrations . those videos are so unpleasant

I was just curious to see what the name for my philosophy is, ig I’m partially an absurdist/ empiricist, thanks I’m excited to read up on these philosophy’s

I see determinism and objectivism as two sides of the same coin. Even though we have this preconceived notion of "free will" (which is a debatable concept in and of itself but that's part of ethics I suppose), our biology, neurology, and mores, as well as our environment builds and literally determines our values and tools for living and the way we think, which is quantifiable in and of itself. But that's just my take, I enjoy channels like these, can't wait to see more. Subscribed

@jeba6549

20 күн бұрын

The opposite of determinism is indeterminism. Objectivism is a joke philosophy that has positions on way more than just ontology.

@ricky.t.1658

14 күн бұрын

Psychology has proved countless times biological determinism is completely false

@ricky.t.1658

14 күн бұрын

@@jeba6549why is objectivism a joke?

@jeba6549

14 күн бұрын

@@ricky.t.1658 It is totally ridiculous no serious philosopher takes it in any way seriously most of its main concepts can be proven wrong empirically and it offers no value to the world in terms of political philosophy. If youre confused about what it is objectivism isnt the claim that objectivity exists or the opposite of relativism its only called objectivism because the person that came up with it (ayn rand) propably thought it would sound more convincing to people that dont understand anything about philosophy

@ruthlessjones8220

13 күн бұрын

@@ricky.t.1658because to be absolutely objective essentially requires you have 100% knowledge.

Nihilism > Objectivism Your bias is pretty out of control. Objectivism is for Karens who want to exist outside the social contract. Theyre the original snowflakes. 😂😂😂

@bodkie

Ай бұрын

If nihilism is so great and nothing matters, why do you care?

@jasontaylor4752

Ай бұрын

@@bodkie Who says I do? I'm just stating the obvious. Objectivists are snowflakes. OP is going easy on them out of bias.

@linuxramblingproductions8554

26 күн бұрын

@@bodkiebecause people like things life can be meaningless but so what? I can still care or do what i want find happiness do things i find subjectively meaningful despite having no objective meaning. Where is the contradiction lmao

Holy shit, I dont know shit about stoicism but from what you explained I've been thinking in that manner for a while now

Yes sir buddy you're a real philosophical disciple Thanks 💯🎖️🧛

Big L on your determinism ranking, proof is logical and apriori, given the causal nature of the universe. It is a tough pill to swallow but one that we all must accept eventually

@GloryBlazer

15 күн бұрын

It doesn't even have to be a tough pill to swallow I don't think, since it actually doesn't interfere or change any practicality of our situation. Predetermination and free will are not mutually exclusive since free will is the result and part of the mechanism of how the world enfolds. The determined outcomes of free will are also not denying the existance of it either.

@GloryBlazer

15 күн бұрын

In other words we decide the way we do, because we choose to do so, and we choose to do so based on the other variables. I got this from CTMU of Chris Langan. I only read alittle bit of it, because his work is very difficult to wrap head around.

@rthuevo

15 күн бұрын

@@GloryBlazer That is a nice take, as a “practical” free will does not interfere with determinism. But the ideas associated with it, such as guilt or blame, do not follow, at least not intuitively. Free will under determinism has less importance, and so we suffer.

@GloryBlazer

15 күн бұрын

@@rthuevo Guilt is a feeling, which is a process that doesn't have to be understood in the context of determinism for it to take place, since our brain functions intuitively without the need for phylosophical knowledge. The same concept that makes us decide can make us feel guilt or blame, but at the same time we can dig deeper and try to understand the hystoric reasons for what has happenned/is happening.

@rthuevo

14 күн бұрын

@@GloryBlazer my apologies, I mean it in the context of the legal system, not in general day to day life

Objectivism is objectively a D tier philosophy. It's simply a justification for greed and selfishness (hint, the reason libertarians love it), and this thought is fundamentally incompatible with humans, because we are naturally wired towards team work and sharing.

@tubsy.

24 күн бұрын

It's incompatible with humans? Oh of course, there are no greedy human beings. The only reason you rank Objectivism low is because you personally don't like it. There's nothing wrong with selfishness, and there's nothing "objective" about your stance.

@TouringWolf42

24 күн бұрын

@@tubsy. Naturally, no, humans aren't greedy, they are taught to be greedy, which is the actual issue. My stance isn't necessarily that humans can't be greedy, but that greediness is inherently an outside negative trait that should be avoided. Humans evolved and are naturally mutually cohesive creatures. Being selfish, greedy is inherently negative because it goes against how we organize socially. Hence why so many inequalities still exist despite our abundance of wealth and resources, you can't be greedy forever dude. Eventually all our resources and wealth will be gone and the only ones screwed over are the ones who weren't lucky enough for the past 100 or so years. But you tell me, do you like selfishness? How do you humans overall view selfish people? I think it's a pretty universal understanding for a reason. Of course, the only "intellectual" to disagree, is a libertarian from decades ago whose ideology now is more associated with lowering the age of consent and trafficking organs. Substantially degenerate in my opinion.

@jeba6549

20 күн бұрын

Its not just because its morally repugnant either objectivism as a whole is a complete joke that nobody takes seriously

@tubsy.

20 күн бұрын

@@jeba6549 Accordimg to what moral standard is it repugnant?

@user-xg3bn9mx7y

18 күн бұрын

Lol. The problem is that selfishness is the only that keeps you alive. If you reject all the things that are beneficial to you, you will have to give up on absolutely everything. Because selfishness is essentially taking care of yourself and pursuing your own goal and keeping your body alive is a part of it. If you weren't selfish, you would give the device you are writing from to the poor, which you haven't done. So you are already a selfish person who thinks only about himself and doesn't share with those who need your device (hint: there are lots of people). So, you are a selfish person yourself and hypocrite.

Enjoyed all the pictures!

As for determinism acknowledging the fact that all your actions will have consequences on your future self makes you think about making the right decisions which is pretty decent

S+ Tier: Realism noun 1. the attitude or practice of accepting a situation as it is and being prepared to deal with it accordingly. Similar: pragmatism practicality matter-of-factness level-headedness clear-sightedness 2. the quality or fact of representing a person, thing, or situation accurately or in a way that is true to life. Similar: authenticity fidelity verisimilitude

@GloryBlazer

15 күн бұрын

It doesn't sound like it delves deep into the mechanisms or reasons as to how things are, or even how things ought to be. More like surface level judgement of what is prefferable. Alot of these phylosophies explore nuance of why and how, without which there are no stepping stones for clear direction or purpose

I agree with all except rationalism It deserves at least A tier by it's impact on modern society (XIX - XXI AD)

The add 2 seconds into the nihilsm explanation really sent me😂

Thanks for making thid video i dont belive in alot of things and dont go by any laws of life now i can see mine from others

bro you can't "objectively" rate philosophies, as long as they make sense within themselves they are valid.

@ThyYniverse

19 күн бұрын

womp womp

@toastge

19 күн бұрын

fool

Nhilism isnt a philosophy but a statement of the nature. Existentialism and absurdism oftentimes are born after God's death

@ricky.t.1658

14 күн бұрын

Nature can’t do statements becouse it can’t talk

i ve just subscribed because your voice made me tingle ❤by asmr lover

The introductions to the different philosophies is great but I don't think we can objectively judge different philosophies at least not without some defined base

Nihilism is fine lol, we don’t need to have a meaning. Religion has poisoned the planet by this thought. 😂

@bodkie

Ай бұрын

Nihilism is the biggest cope since religion.

@MintRye

Ай бұрын

@@bodkie I think you’re mixing the two.. you realize anyone who is nihilistic isn’t coping on anything.. if anyone is coping it’s the one that’s religious. They need a majestic unicorn to cope with the fact that life is so fucked.. I don’t need to Cope. Life is fucked. Oh well. But i’m not gonna go on my knees or go to a church every Sunday to pray to a false prophet.. it’s embarrassing. 🙊🤷🏻‍♂️

@linuxramblingproductions8554

26 күн бұрын

@@bodkiewhats the cope its accepting an outcome even if it might not sound good to certain people. How is it cope?

@MintRye

26 күн бұрын

@@bodkie ironic.. i bet you think a fairy man in the sky exist to cope with your shitty reality 🤣

@Paraselene_Tao

16 күн бұрын

​@@bodkie "Nihilism is the biggest cope since religion." (Doesn't explain any further.) lol, okay, buddy. 😅

A philosophy tier list doesn't need to exist

@n2da9

Ай бұрын

what?

@R3dzio

Ай бұрын

so does your comment

@iforget6940

Ай бұрын

@R3dzio now you get it, it wouldn't exist if this video did not exist

@CiphersVII

Ай бұрын

what's your point?

@iforget6940

Ай бұрын

@CiphersVII that it's not necessary to compare philosophy to me philosophy is interconnected in concept you can start anywhere but you can't understand it as a standalone concept nhilism and existentialism for example are two sides of the same coin yet he put nhilism at d tier and existentialism at a tier makes no sense they need to be together like yin and yang He is also trying to rank them and any person can disagree with him and change the ranking its a subjective and unnecessary ranking unless it's just for himself and it probably says more about him and how he ranks his philosophy than the philosophy itself But I do say it with all respect

I see you on that grind bro

@jacobschroeder5615

23 күн бұрын

That Chat GPT grind 🦾

@Avaturtal

23 күн бұрын

@@jacobschroeder5615 what do you mean? I'm confused.

Stoic surrealism is pretty cool. Being okay and letting this absurd existence not deter you from loving your best life is pretty great.

2 views in 40 seconds, you fell off....

@gagongtarantado

27 күн бұрын

we'll make a comeback 💪

I always wondered my thoughts, i believe in helping others and being kind to others. And based on the choices you make you'll be forgiven. I try to be happy as possible and always motivate others and im very prideful, and i try to take care of myself. What would that make me really?

important note: in writing your script please double check the pronunciation of foreign words and names, a quick google translate will tell you how to correctly pronounce the words. otherwise, the video was well made and well researched 👍

I think we should consider this video as only a brief explanation of the most relevant philosophical trends because the form of evaluation shown in the video is subjective and is just a way to present information

Great video! did determinism dirty though ;( (also determinism really cant be proven or disproved. though the burden of proof would be on the determinist i find that the take away from determinism is a really strong and powerful way to look at the world and is really a great tool for burdensome emotions so i think it was a little low especially considering the placement of absurdism non the less great video like and sub from me!)

I didn't realize how aligned I am with nihilism. The being free part is very true. I can do things with more confidence with the mindset "they won't really care anyway" knowing how little the world cares about your action really lifts the pressure of doing "good"

Stoicism has been my favorite for years, I can't seem to apply it for crap but it's my favorite regardless

i was expecting this video to compare philosophy like it has to be one thing or the other but i realised that most of these exist not on a spectrum but parallel to each other and depending on our situation are useful to varying degrees.

Just to know how did you learned those cause i feel some arent presented like they should have been

The of philosophies listed here(I understand that this is a very heated debate, so keep in mind. I am a total newbie when it comes to philosophy. Also, this will be a biased ranking based on my own personal viewpoint, as I don’t really believe philosophy to be an objective subject) The Tier List: S: Existentialism A+: Absurdism(this one is very similar to Existentialism, but my problem with it lies in the framing. Sisyphus and boulder example seemingly portrays human experience as a constant struggle against the inherent futility of our existence. While I agree with the concept that existence doesn’t hold inherent meaning, I think framing it as a struggle is a flawed way to go about things, as it only serves to promote a sense of hopelessness, perhaps you could argue that’s an individual problem, but I would still consider thing such things as a factor when raking these philosophies) A: Empiricism(I think placing value on personal experience is immensely important, so that I very much appreciate in regards to this philosophy, to that there’s its relation to the scientific method, which is one of the founding models of modern science. However, I think the more complicated a topic becomes, the harder is for our experience to accurately reflect the depths of what is exactly happening, and I think if you take empiricism principles too far you end up with clearly ridiculous concepts, such as the earth being flat. Still, I think this is a good placement for it) B: Stoicism(I believe there is a lot of wisdom behind this philosophy, because realizing what is outside of one’s control of time serves to alleviate anxiety, ultimately improving one’s ability to live within their means. While still managing to placing emphasis on the value of moral and work ethics, something other philosophies such as Nihilism and Determinism are severely lacking However, the positing of inherent universal meaning, is one I find to be flawed. I also believe the practicality of much of its wisdom can fall flat in regards to validation and placing value on emotional experience, things that have psychologically proven to help improve one’s mental state And stoic advice can often times prove unhelpful in moments of crisis as rationality has often fallen to the wayside, speaking of which) Rationalism(As the video has already highlighted, this one shares, many similarities and differences with Empiricism, alongside of similar propensity, if not greater for scientific advancement, but I feel it’s lacking in terms of practicality and is very similar to stoicism, in the sense that it’s prone to invalidating the value of personal experience, which can make quite ineffective on an individual level In favor of rationalism, however, I will say that the concept of inherent universal truths at least mathematically speaking is one I can get behind more than inherent universal meaning, so consider that a W for rationalism) C+: Utilitarianism(My problems utilitarianism down from its portrayal of itself as a rational logic based system of morality, which when considering the concept I find to be frankly absurd First of all the summation of human life to mathematical value is my eyes fundamentally flawed, because it’s essentially impossible to boil down human experience in such a manner. You know that one infamous quote about how “one death is a tragedy 10 million is a statistic” or something like that, yeah, that’s essentially utilitarianism. Numerical statistics create an emotional distance that poses a risk to the moral framework utilitarianism is working with, for you see, empathy/sympathy is in my opinion, the foundation of much of human morality, because it provides us with the ability to obtain understanding of others, allowing for compassionate and considerate action, so without empathy/sympathy as a guideline, Morality can easily become muddled, due to a lack of care regarding the potential harm Inflicted That’s not even beginning to mention the numerous problems that have so many factors that may become too complex to be calculated, or, as the video highlighted, the problems when it comes to the defining groups of interest and let’s not even get into the overlap with the negative elements of collectivism Still, I suppose in small scale scenarios this one does have some practical usage) Objectivism(look at the US, nuff said) D: Nihilism and Determinism(I’m grouping these two together because they suffer from the same fundamental issues, that being a propensity for promoting depressive outlooks/negative behavior and a lack of inherent wisdom While I agree with the premise behind both of these philosophies, to some extent at least, on a base level they provide zero wisdom or ideas on how to go about living one’s life, which is kind of the purpose of philosophy Best way I could describe what I’m talking about is in analogy. Personally, I don’t like chocolate ice cream I’ll still eat it, but I find the flavor to be kind of overrated, however, if you were to combine chocolate with other flavors and various mix-ins then I’d most likely enjoy greatly. Essentially Nihilism and Determinism are just foundations for better philosophies, like Absurdism, Compatibilism and Of course Existentialism)

Last year I listened to a good book called Determined. Full of evidence about determinism. I'm not fully either/or these philosophies- haven't reached conclusions yet.

here we go, time to pick a new one