#1 ·
So, this is what things looked like today:
A friend of mine recently dropped this bombshell on me: "Philosophy is garbage!" Honestly? I took it almost as a personal insult. I still don't buy it. Philosophy isn't garbage—in fact, it’s the very tool we need to actually identify what *is* garbage. So, let's get into it. What exactly qualifies as garbage? Life itself? Is there any better candidate for that definition than life? It’s all right there! Even Confucius said everything is garbage except for taking a leak—though he did note that even that becomes garbage if you're trying to go against the wind.
Some self-proclaimed intellectuals love to claim that the most important thing in life is asking the RIGHT QUESTION. It’s a clever little trick, isn't it? It implies that if we just nail the question, the "right" answer will naturally fall into our laps. As if everything would just click into place! But let’s get back to the actual heart of the matter: Is philosophy actually useful, or is it just a massive load of garbage? Think about it. If you believe philosophy can hand you a set of final, absolute truths to live by—then no, it's total nonsense. But if you see it as a tool to help you realize that those definitive answers don't even exist in the first place? Then it might actually be worth something. Which is it?
And that’s exactly how the confusion starts. Someone—like a friend of mine—ends up blaming philosophy instead of just admitting that life itself is a mess. Why blame the ideas when it's the reality that's broken?
When you’re starving on some deserted island, a rifle isn't exactly a meal ticket. Sure, you could hunt something to stay alive, but more realistically? It's a way out. It lets you end the misery before the hunger eats you alive. Philosophy works the exact same way. When you're stuck here on Earth—this absolute circus of a place where everything constantly goes wrong—philosophy won't suddenly hand you the "meaning of life" on a silver platter. No. It just helps you realize that there isn't one. Period. Maybe there's some better existence waiting for us somewhere beyond the horizon. But let's be real: if the architect of that "better" place is the same one who designed this chaotic mess we call home, then even if paradise exists, I'm not interested. Why would I want to move into a house built by the same guy who rigged the foundation to fail?
Philosophy is the culprit behind this latest conclusion—the most pessimistic one yet. Honestly, philosophy is like a loaded gun that we can only ever turn on ourselves. There isn’t anyone else left to eliminate with it! Who else is there? Certainly not the guy pulling the strings behind this whole senseless spectacle.
-----------------------------------------------------
Can you grasp the core of what I’m getting at here? Let me lay it out: What can a human being *actually* know? And more importantly, what role does philosophy play in uncovering that truth? Is our perception of reality even remotely accurate? To what extent can we trust our own minds? If our cognition is flawed—if we’re just guessing in the dark—then isn't philosophy essentially useless? It fails its one true purpose! It misses the entire point! But, if our knowledge is sound, then philosophy actually holds weight. It matters. Otherwise, it's just noise.
Why? Just... why? Just me. Do I really have to spell everything out in my opening posts? Honestly, I don't see why there's any actual need for it, especially not in a situation like this one.
So, let me get this straight. We're talking about philosophy here, and you want to move this entire thread over to the religion section? Really? Where exactly are you planning on relocating this?
-------------------------------------------------------
Do you really think Confucius was getting at something with that statement? Everything is absolute garbage. Honestly, the only thing that isn't total trash is taking a leak—though even that becomes a complete disaster when you’re trying to go against the wind. Is this biography actually less philosophical, or is it just miles away from the truth found in Hegel or some other heavyweight thinker? On what grounds? Is it really Hegel’s clunky, impenetrable way of putting things that gives him the edge over Confucius? Or is there something more to it?
--------------------------------------------------------
So, you’re telling me the issue is the thread title? That I didn't use all caps? What on earth are you even talking about? Who actually uses Caps Lock like that? Seriously?
The title might technically match what’s written, but let’s be honest—it misses the mark. If the actual content is diving into the deep end of defining absolute nonsense and debating whether philosophy itself is just a pile of garbage, then this title isn't doing its job for a PDF on philosophy. It's just off. Why settle for "accurate" when you can be precise? Maybe you should take another crack at it. Seriously. Why don't you try re-thinking that opening post entirely? Rephrase it. Rebuild it from the ground up. It’s clearly not working. Look, the whole point of what you’re trying to say here is being lost because this thread is getting moved. Why does this always happen? We start a real conversation and then—boom—it gets relocated. It's frustrating.
So, you're telling me the headline is the issue, but then you pivot and claim the entire opening post needs a complete overhaul? Wait a second. Are we really saying the problem isn't about how the intro is written anymore, but just the title itself? What happened to the original plan?
And what about that opening post? What if you just told Confucius to ditch that whole sentence and... Everything is just garbage. Honestly, even taking a leak feels like a total disaster when you're trying to do it against the wind. It’s written. Everything is excessive. Honestly, even the things that don't look like overkill at first glance? They’re excessive too. It's all just too much.What do you think Confucius would even make of a proposal like that? Honestly, I doubt he’d take it well. He’d probably start laying down some heavy truth bombs the second you tried to corner him with such idiocy. You can't just walk up to a sage with that kind of nonsense and expect a polite nod. Then again, if you posted that garbage on some random American forum, who knows how much chaos you'd stir up? Is philosophy just a massive pile of nonsense? Is it all just high-minded word games designed to make people feel important while accomplishing absolutely nothing? Honestly, sometimes I look at the sheer amount of fluff being churned out and I have to wonder. What are we actually doing here? We spend decades dissecting the "essence of being" or arguing over whether a chair is truly a chair, but then you step outside and realize the real world doesn't give a damn about your syllogisms. Does it actually solve anything? Can a treatise on ethics fix a broken supply chain or stop a corporate giant like Amazon from crushing small businesses? Probably not. And yet, here we are. We can't seem to stop. Why is that? Is there some hidden utility buried under all the jargon, or are we just spinning our wheels in a vacuum? I’m curious what you all think. Is this pursuit a legitimate search for truth, or are we just paying tuition to learn how to talk in circles? Nobody even blinks an eye, right? How does that work? What is it about us Americans that makes everyone act like some kind of fragile saints who aren't allowed to say "shit" because it might offend someone's fake sense of morality? Whose morality is it, anyway? And don't even get me started on the vocabulary tolerated on this forum. Honestly, I’ve noticed that freedom of speech is way higher here than on other message boards, which I am totally fine with. But then, suddenly, you decide to start policing everything based on your own twisted little criteria. Twisted compared to how this board has always operated! It’s a damn shame in general, but it’s an even bigger shame that you’re playing cop just because you clearly have a grudge against a user you don't like. Look, I don't exactly care for you either, but I don't go around making my personal issues your problem. Do you really think that just because you're a moderator, you have the right to dump your frustrations on me? Who gave you that authority?
If you go ahead and wipe all this correspondence, we’re going to have to escalate this to a higher level. Then you'll finally have a chance to explain exactly why you're so frustrated. And just so we're clear—I don't just copy everything I write. I actually have screenshots of some pretty interesting developments, including all this harassment you've been putting me through.
-------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
Let's just cut to the chase here: Couldn't this be the thread title? Why not?
-------------------------------------------------------------
In what way is it "excessive"? What does that even mean? Do you honestly think the word "bullshit" is too vulgar? (Even though that word isn't vulgar at all!) I am certain you know that "bullshit" is one of the most normal, everyday terms used in English discussions. These hypocrites use the English version of the word just so they don't offend anyone's delicate ears with the American equivalent. I don't know how else to characterize this hypocrisy than as something vehemently idiotic. When someone lies, these subhuman hypocrites are too afraid to actually say that the person is lying, so they say they "aren't telling the truth." What kind of idiocy is that? Aren't you still embarrassed to insist on this level of peak hypocritical, fake morality that serves absolutely no purpose?
Look, if you aren't ashamed—and clearly you aren't, since you're still digging your heels in about changing the thread title—then at least explain to us what you mean by the title being excessive. Then, go ahead and change the title yourself (to your own shame). You certainly won't get my permission for something so idiotic. It’s idiotic because there is no logical justification for your stubborn insistence that the title has to change...
I'll ask one more time: what exactly makes the thread title excessive?
I'm counting on that ingenuity of yours to explain exactly how the word "bullshit" in the title constitutes an excess.
SO, AFTER I ASKED VOLVER TO EXPLAIN WHAT SHE EVEN MEANS BY THE TITLE BEING EXCESSIVE, SHE JUST COMPLETELY DELETES THE WHOLE THREAD... MAYBE NOW WE CAN FINALLY GET AN ANSWER FROM VOLVER TO THE QUESTION IN THE LAST POST: WHAT IS SO "EXCESSIVE" ABOUT THE WORD BULLSHIT IN THE THREAD TITLE THAT SHE UNJUSTIFIABLY ERASED IT???
THE SUPPRESSION OF FREE SPEECH ON THIS PHILOSOPHY FORUM IS PARTICULARLY TRAGIC!!!
A friend of mine recently dropped this bombshell on me: "Philosophy is garbage!" Honestly? I took it almost as a personal insult. I still don't buy it. Philosophy isn't garbage—in fact, it’s the very tool we need to actually identify what *is* garbage. So, let's get into it. What exactly qualifies as garbage? Life itself? Is there any better candidate for that definition than life? It’s all right there! Even Confucius said everything is garbage except for taking a leak—though he did note that even that becomes garbage if you're trying to go against the wind.
Some self-proclaimed intellectuals love to claim that the most important thing in life is asking the RIGHT QUESTION. It’s a clever little trick, isn't it? It implies that if we just nail the question, the "right" answer will naturally fall into our laps. As if everything would just click into place! But let’s get back to the actual heart of the matter: Is philosophy actually useful, or is it just a massive load of garbage? Think about it. If you believe philosophy can hand you a set of final, absolute truths to live by—then no, it's total nonsense. But if you see it as a tool to help you realize that those definitive answers don't even exist in the first place? Then it might actually be worth something. Which is it?
And that’s exactly how the confusion starts. Someone—like a friend of mine—ends up blaming philosophy instead of just admitting that life itself is a mess. Why blame the ideas when it's the reality that's broken?
When you’re starving on some deserted island, a rifle isn't exactly a meal ticket. Sure, you could hunt something to stay alive, but more realistically? It's a way out. It lets you end the misery before the hunger eats you alive. Philosophy works the exact same way. When you're stuck here on Earth—this absolute circus of a place where everything constantly goes wrong—philosophy won't suddenly hand you the "meaning of life" on a silver platter. No. It just helps you realize that there isn't one. Period. Maybe there's some better existence waiting for us somewhere beyond the horizon. But let's be real: if the architect of that "better" place is the same one who designed this chaotic mess we call home, then even if paradise exists, I'm not interested. Why would I want to move into a house built by the same guy who rigged the foundation to fail?
Philosophy is the culprit behind this latest conclusion—the most pessimistic one yet. Honestly, philosophy is like a loaded gun that we can only ever turn on ourselves. There isn’t anyone else left to eliminate with it! Who else is there? Certainly not the guy pulling the strings behind this whole senseless spectacle.
-----------------------------------------------------
Back again. Or should I say, back at it? There’s no escaping it. Once you start down this rabbit hole, there's really no way out, is there? You try to walk away, you try to find some peace and quiet, but the cycle just pulls you right back in. It’s relentless. Just like everything else in this crazy country. Why does it always feel like we're just circling the drain? Anyway, I'm back. Let's get into it. kaže:
I am telling you once again: stick to the guidelines! Rules for starting new threads in the Philosophy section.The title isn't quite hitting the mark. Sure, it technically matches what you wrote, but since the whole point is questioning how we define "bullshit" and whether philosophy itself is just a load of crap, the current heading doesn't really fit a philosophy PDF. Why settle? Maybe try again. Reframe it. Rebuild that intro post from the ground up to actually capture the core of what you’re trying to say. This one is getting moved.
Can you grasp the core of what I’m getting at here? Let me lay it out: What can a human being *actually* know? And more importantly, what role does philosophy play in uncovering that truth? Is our perception of reality even remotely accurate? To what extent can we trust our own minds? If our cognition is flawed—if we’re just guessing in the dark—then isn't philosophy essentially useless? It fails its one true purpose! It misses the entire point! But, if our knowledge is sound, then philosophy actually holds weight. It matters. Otherwise, it's just noise.
Why? Just... why? Just me. Do I really have to spell everything out in my opening posts? Honestly, I don't see why there's any actual need for it, especially not in a situation like this one.
So, let me get this straight. We're talking about philosophy here, and you want to move this entire thread over to the religion section? Really? Where exactly are you planning on relocating this?
-------------------------------------------------------
Do you really think Confucius was getting at something with that statement? Everything is absolute garbage. Honestly, the only thing that isn't total trash is taking a leak—though even that becomes a complete disaster when you’re trying to go against the wind. Is this biography actually less philosophical, or is it just miles away from the truth found in Hegel or some other heavyweight thinker? On what grounds? Is it really Hegel’s clunky, impenetrable way of putting things that gives him the edge over Confucius? Or is there something more to it?
--------------------------------------------------------
Back again? Is that what we're doing now? Back to square one? It feels like we're just circling the drain, isn't it? Why does everything always have to loop back to the same old arguments? We talk, we vent, we think we've made progress, and then—boom—right back where we started. Does anyone actually learn anything, or are we just performing for each other? I'm exhausted. Truly. The user said:
If you want to jumpstart this thread again, you could just keep it brief. Use what was written above as your opening post. For the title, go with: What can a person truly know? And please, no all-caps in the title—just capitalize the first letter.
He won't be moved an inch to any spot where he can actually be seen. Not happening. Why would they let that happen? No way.
So, you’re telling me the issue is the thread title? That I didn't use all caps? What on earth are you even talking about? Who actually uses Caps Lock like that? Seriously?
The title might technically match what’s written, but let’s be honest—it misses the mark. If the actual content is diving into the deep end of defining absolute nonsense and debating whether philosophy itself is just a pile of garbage, then this title isn't doing its job for a PDF on philosophy. It's just off. Why settle for "accurate" when you can be precise? Maybe you should take another crack at it. Seriously. Why don't you try re-thinking that opening post entirely? Rephrase it. Rebuild it from the ground up. It’s clearly not working. Look, the whole point of what you’re trying to say here is being lost because this thread is getting moved. Why does this always happen? We start a real conversation and then—boom—it gets relocated. It's frustrating.
So, you're telling me the headline is the issue, but then you pivot and claim the entire opening post needs a complete overhaul? Wait a second. Are we really saying the problem isn't about how the intro is written anymore, but just the title itself? What happened to the original plan?
And what about that opening post? What if you just told Confucius to ditch that whole sentence and... Everything is just garbage. Honestly, even taking a leak feels like a total disaster when you're trying to do it against the wind. It’s written. Everything is excessive. Honestly, even the things that don't look like overkill at first glance? They’re excessive too. It's all just too much.What do you think Confucius would even make of a proposal like that? Honestly, I doubt he’d take it well. He’d probably start laying down some heavy truth bombs the second you tried to corner him with such idiocy. You can't just walk up to a sage with that kind of nonsense and expect a polite nod. Then again, if you posted that garbage on some random American forum, who knows how much chaos you'd stir up? Is philosophy just a massive pile of nonsense? Is it all just high-minded word games designed to make people feel important while accomplishing absolutely nothing? Honestly, sometimes I look at the sheer amount of fluff being churned out and I have to wonder. What are we actually doing here? We spend decades dissecting the "essence of being" or arguing over whether a chair is truly a chair, but then you step outside and realize the real world doesn't give a damn about your syllogisms. Does it actually solve anything? Can a treatise on ethics fix a broken supply chain or stop a corporate giant like Amazon from crushing small businesses? Probably not. And yet, here we are. We can't seem to stop. Why is that? Is there some hidden utility buried under all the jargon, or are we just spinning our wheels in a vacuum? I’m curious what you all think. Is this pursuit a legitimate search for truth, or are we just paying tuition to learn how to talk in circles? Nobody even blinks an eye, right? How does that work? What is it about us Americans that makes everyone act like some kind of fragile saints who aren't allowed to say "shit" because it might offend someone's fake sense of morality? Whose morality is it, anyway? And don't even get me started on the vocabulary tolerated on this forum. Honestly, I’ve noticed that freedom of speech is way higher here than on other message boards, which I am totally fine with. But then, suddenly, you decide to start policing everything based on your own twisted little criteria. Twisted compared to how this board has always operated! It’s a damn shame in general, but it’s an even bigger shame that you’re playing cop just because you clearly have a grudge against a user you don't like. Look, I don't exactly care for you either, but I don't go around making my personal issues your problem. Do you really think that just because you're a moderator, you have the right to dump your frustrations on me? Who gave you that authority?
If you go ahead and wipe all this correspondence, we’re going to have to escalate this to a higher level. Then you'll finally have a chance to explain exactly why you're so frustrated. And just so we're clear—I don't just copy everything I write. I actually have screenshots of some pretty interesting developments, including all this harassment you've been putting me through.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Back again. Or should I say, back to square one? It feels like we’re just spinning our wheels, doesn't it? We talk, we argue, we pretend we've made progress, and then—poof—we find ourselves right back where we started. Is anyone actually listening, or are we all just shouting into the void? It's exhausting. Honestly, it's infuriating. Why do we keep doing this to ourselves? kaže:
I already told you exactly what the issue is. Look at the headline! I brought up the whole Caps Lock thing because you used all caps for one of your previous threads, which is a direct violation of the forum rules—just like how you can't blow up an image to take over the entire screen like you did here. It’s right there in the guidelines I linked for you. And let's be clear: the moderators have every right to step in and change a thread title if it doesn't follow the rules. It's all clearly laid out in the handbook. Why is this so difficult?
Also, I have a recommendation for the opening post.
But you aren't even willing to try and understand where the issue lies, let alone accept a suggestion. And frankly, I'm done arguing about this.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Let's just cut to the chase here: Couldn't this be the thread title? Why not?
-------------------------------------------------------------
volver said:Your current thread title can't stay because it's excessive.
So, I suggest
What can a person truly know?
Or
The role of philosophy
(those are excerpts from your own sentences right here)
If you want a new title, I can change it. I could even change it without consulting the author, though I wouldn't do that. Otherwise, everything stays as it is, or you can just go ahead and change it yourself by editing your opening post.
In what way is it "excessive"? What does that even mean? Do you honestly think the word "bullshit" is too vulgar? (Even though that word isn't vulgar at all!) I am certain you know that "bullshit" is one of the most normal, everyday terms used in English discussions. These hypocrites use the English version of the word just so they don't offend anyone's delicate ears with the American equivalent. I don't know how else to characterize this hypocrisy than as something vehemently idiotic. When someone lies, these subhuman hypocrites are too afraid to actually say that the person is lying, so they say they "aren't telling the truth." What kind of idiocy is that? Aren't you still embarrassed to insist on this level of peak hypocritical, fake morality that serves absolutely no purpose?
Look, if you aren't ashamed—and clearly you aren't, since you're still digging your heels in about changing the thread title—then at least explain to us what you mean by the title being excessive. Then, go ahead and change the title yourself (to your own shame). You certainly won't get my permission for something so idiotic. It’s idiotic because there is no logical justification for your stubborn insistence that the title has to change...
I'll ask one more time: what exactly makes the thread title excessive?
I'm counting on that ingenuity of yours to explain exactly how the word "bullshit" in the title constitutes an excess.
SO, AFTER I ASKED VOLVER TO EXPLAIN WHAT SHE EVEN MEANS BY THE TITLE BEING EXCESSIVE, SHE JUST COMPLETELY DELETES THE WHOLE THREAD... MAYBE NOW WE CAN FINALLY GET AN ANSWER FROM VOLVER TO THE QUESTION IN THE LAST POST: WHAT IS SO "EXCESSIVE" ABOUT THE WORD BULLSHIT IN THE THREAD TITLE THAT SHE UNJUSTIFIABLY ERASED IT???
THE SUPPRESSION OF FREE SPEECH ON THIS PHILOSOPHY FORUM IS PARTICULARLY TRAGIC!!!