You Should Philosophymaxx

TAChipmunk

TAChipmunk

Iron
Joined
Jul 27, 2023
Posts
123
Reputation
86
My main gripe with the black pill is its obsession with materialism.

People here have talked before about being so black-pilled that they then switched to the other side of the spectrum in being blue-pilled or white-pilled in the case of horseshoe theory. You become so hyper-fixated on looking good, and believing that all forms of outward success are contingent on your genetics, that you realise that you can't do anything about it, so you become blue-pilled - not in the way where you sell yourself a delusional lie that 'being yourself' will get you women and money, but more so a chad Stoic, accepting a more comfortable truth about the world, that it is futile to try be something that you weren't destined to become, and you maximise what you can control, which is living in a way authentic to your heart.

The missing piece in the puzzle in all of this, and the flaw with such pills, is that they all reflect on material things. You chase women, money, status, fame, accolades, numbers, intelligence, but in the end, does this really matter? Does life's value come from having certain quantities and metrics in these things? Does it come from people's perception of you?

It extends even to the self-improvement niche, whereby people who reject the aforementioned things to not be the key to having a well-lived life, make a case for other things. They argue that concepts like maximising your own personal growth, exploring your relationships, forging deeper connections with your loved ones, and creating a sense of purpose for yourself that transcends material wealth are much more important than anything you could physically possess. The problem with this argument however, is that all of these things are actually, by in large, material things, as material things can still be abstractions, and concepts which can be measured and compared against a control or an average. For example with the case about personal growth, let's say you and your buddy start going to the gym, and you can bench the same amount, let's say 50kg, but then he progresses faster than you, and in a month, he's benching 70kg, whilst you're only benching 65kg. Even though you have personally grown by the virtue of strength which should make you happy, you are more than likely sad that somebody, with the same input as you, is doing better than you through no fault of your, or their own, and that they simply have an unfair advantage. You might be in a worse mental state than you were if you had never even set foot in the gym perhaps.

It's not a case of the journey being more important than the destination, but that we have been conditioned to believe that growth itself is a virtue we should be striving for regardless of where we end up, as if that really is the key to happiness. But once growth ends, what happens then, do we feel sad? Well you might say that we have come a much further way than where we first started, whether that be stronger, richer, more wise etc, but should that make us feel better or worse about ourselves?

It is completely human to have desires and aspirations. These are healthy things that should be nourished carefully to live in harmony with our psychology, however as humans, we often let our desires have power over us. If your internal mental state is determined by an inanimate object being in your possession, or fulfilling something abstract, like love or lust, to satisfy your corporeal greed machine, than you inadvertently admit that something external to you has power over you, and you are therefore a slave to it.

I see all these people here bragging about muh, 'sLaYiNg StAcIeS' and these coomers in the comments, reading and jeering OP on like cucked voyeurs, with just the computer screen offering the privacy of a curtain of concealment from their real envy, as they wish they could do the same, but my question to them, would be, why is that so important? Why are you allowing yourself to be unhappy because you didn't experience what OP experienced? Why would you let a woman you've never met in your life make you feel a certain way about yourself? 'Oooo my pee pee feels good, ooo this is great!', like, bro... seriously?

True happiness is a choice. Nothing, or no one, can make you happy, as it is an internal thing. If you seek happiness from the external, then you place an impossible demand on them that will never be fulfilled. It sets them up for failure, and you up for disappointment. Contentment is our default internal state, and society robs that from us as our minds form callouses to shield us from the truths of this world, and ignorance turns to bliss.

However amazing your material situation is, understand that in the end, there is no objective purpose to life, and in the end, none of this matters. The meaning of life, is to create your own arbitrary meaning in it.

If you still want to cage yourself in the prison that society is, then you should still philosophymaxx because it will make you a more emotionally intelligent and wise person, because the skill of though provocation is something that will improve your life in many aspects, such as impressing employers in interviews, and having healthier relationships.
 
  • Woah
  • Ugh..
  • JFL
Reactions: NZb6Air, Tabula Rasa, iloveboobs and 1 other person
My main gripe with the black pill is its obsession with materialism.

People here have talked before about being so black-pilled that they then switched to the other side of the spectrum in being blue-pilled or white-pilled in the case of horseshoe theory. You become so hyper-fixated on looking good, and believing that all forms of outward success are contingent on your genetics, that you realise that you can't do anything about it, so you become blue-pilled - not in the way where you sell yourself a delusional lie that 'being yourself' will get you women and money, but more so a chad Stoic, accepting a more comfortable truth about the world, that it is futile to try be something that you weren't destined to become, and you maximise what you can control, which is living in a way authentic to your heart.

The missing piece in the puzzle in all of this, and the flaw with such pills, is that they all reflect on material things. You chase women, money, status, fame, accolades, numbers, intelligence, but in the end, does this really matter? Does life's value come from having certain quantities and metrics in these things? Does it come from people's perception of you?

It extends even to the self-improvement niche, whereby people who reject the aforementioned things to not be the key to having a well-lived life, make a case for other things. They argue that concepts like maximising your own personal growth, exploring your relationships, forging deeper connections with your loved ones, and creating a sense of purpose for yourself that transcends material wealth are much more important than anything you could physically possess. The problem with this argument however, is that all of these things are actually, by in large, material things, as material things can still be abstractions, and concepts which can be measured and compared against a control or an average. For example with the case about personal growth, let's say you and your buddy start going to the gym, and you can bench the same amount, let's say 50kg, but then he progresses faster than you, and in a month, he's benching 70kg, whilst you're only benching 65kg. Even though you have personally grown by the virtue of strength which should make you happy, you are more than likely sad that somebody, with the same input as you, is doing better than you through no fault of your, or their own, and that they simply have an unfair advantage. You might be in a worse mental state than you were if you had never even set foot in the gym perhaps.

It's not a case of the journey being more important than the destination, but that we have been conditioned to believe that growth itself is a virtue we should be striving for regardless of where we end up, as if that really is the key to happiness. But once growth ends, what happens then, do we feel sad? Well you might say that we have come a much further way than where we first started, whether that be stronger, richer, more wise etc, but should that make us feel better or worse about ourselves?

It is completely human to have desires and aspirations. These are healthy things that should be nourished carefully to live in harmony with our psychology, however as humans, we often let our desires have power over us. If your internal mental state is determined by an inanimate object being in your possession, or fulfilling something abstract, like love or lust, to satisfy your corporeal greed machine, than you inadvertently admit that something external to you has power over you, and you are therefore a slave to it.

I see all these people here bragging about muh, 'sLaYiNg StAcIeS' and these coomers in the comments, reading and jeering OP on like cucked voyeurs, with just the computer screen offering the privacy of a curtain of concealment from their real envy, as they wish they could do the same, but my question to them, would be, why is that so important? Why are you allowing yourself to be unhappy because you didn't experience what OP experienced? Why would you let a woman you've never met in your life make you feel a certain way about yourself? 'Oooo my pee pee feels good, ooo this is great!', like, bro... seriously?

True happiness is a choice. Nothing, or no one, can make you happy, as it is an internal thing. If you seek happiness from the external, then you place an impossible demand on them that will never be fulfilled. It sets them up for failure, and you up for disappointment. Contentment is our default internal state, and society robs that from us as our minds form callouses to shield us from the truths of this world, and ignorance turns to bliss.

However amazing your material situation is, understand that in the end, there is no objective purpose to life, and in the end, none of this matters. The meaning of life, is to create your own arbitrary meaning in it.

If you still want to cage yourself in the prison that society is, then you should still philosophymaxx because it will make you a more emotionally intelligent and wise person, because the skill of though provocation is something that will improve your life in many aspects, such as impressing employers in interviews, and having healthier relationships.
who is your favourite philosopher?
 
  • +1
Reactions: iloveboobs
Whatt is this gigacope bhai, looks are everything. Over for you dalit wannabe philosopher. Muh philosophy, who gives a shit get mogged by tyrones BBC.
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Jonnyboi, shikataganai, laaltin and 3 others
so we should just abandond trying to get hot women, looking better, being stronger, getting richer so that we can sit all day thinking about philosophical questions? im sorry nigga this is a bit cucked. some good points but we are made to want materialistic things
 
  • +1
Reactions: Schizotypalcel
My main gripe with the black pill is its obsession with materialism.

People here have talked before about being so black-pilled that they then switched to the other side of the spectrum in being blue-pilled or white-pilled in the case of horseshoe theory. You become so hyper-fixated on looking good, and believing that all forms of outward success are contingent on your genetics, that you realise that you can't do anything about it, so you become blue-pilled - not in the way where you sell yourself a delusional lie that 'being yourself' will get you women and money, but more so a chad Stoic, accepting a more comfortable truth about the world, that it is futile to try be something that you weren't destined to become, and you maximise what you can control, which is living in a way authentic to your heart.

The missing piece in the puzzle in all of this, and the flaw with such pills, is that they all reflect on material things. You chase women, money, status, fame, accolades, numbers, intelligence, but in the end, does this really matter? Does life's value come from having certain quantities and metrics in these things? Does it come from people's perception of you?

It extends even to the self-improvement niche, whereby people who reject the aforementioned things to not be the key to having a well-lived life, make a case for other things. They argue that concepts like maximising your own personal growth, exploring your relationships, forging deeper connections with your loved ones, and creating a sense of purpose for yourself that transcends material wealth are much more important than anything you could physically possess. The problem with this argument however, is that all of these things are actually, by in large, material things, as material things can still be abstractions, and concepts which can be measured and compared against a control or an average. For example with the case about personal growth, let's say you and your buddy start going to the gym, and you can bench the same amount, let's say 50kg, but then he progresses faster than you, and in a month, he's benching 70kg, whilst you're only benching 65kg. Even though you have personally grown by the virtue of strength which should make you happy, you are more than likely sad that somebody, with the same input as you, is doing better than you through no fault of your, or their own, and that they simply have an unfair advantage. You might be in a worse mental state than you were if you had never even set foot in the gym perhaps.

It's not a case of the journey being more important than the destination, but that we have been conditioned to believe that growth itself is a virtue we should be striving for regardless of where we end up, as if that really is the key to happiness. But once growth ends, what happens then, do we feel sad? Well you might say that we have come a much further way than where we first started, whether that be stronger, richer, more wise etc, but should that make us feel better or worse about ourselves?

It is completely human to have desires and aspirations. These are healthy things that should be nourished carefully to live in harmony with our psychology, however as humans, we often let our desires have power over us. If your internal mental state is determined by an inanimate object being in your possession, or fulfilling something abstract, like love or lust, to satisfy your corporeal greed machine, than you inadvertently admit that something external to you has power over you, and you are therefore a slave to it.

I see all these people here bragging about muh, 'sLaYiNg StAcIeS' and these coomers in the comments, reading and jeering OP on like cucked voyeurs, with just the computer screen offering the privacy of a curtain of concealment from their real envy, as they wish they could do the same, but my question to them, would be, why is that so important? Why are you allowing yourself to be unhappy because you didn't experience what OP experienced? Why would you let a woman you've never met in your life make you feel a certain way about yourself? 'Oooo my pee pee feels good, ooo this is great!', like, bro... seriously?

True happiness is a choice. Nothing, or no one, can make you happy, as it is an internal thing. If you seek happiness from the external, then you place an impossible demand on them that will never be fulfilled. It sets them up for failure, and you up for disappointment. Contentment is our default internal state, and society robs that from us as our minds form callouses to shield us from the truths of this world, and ignorance turns to bliss.

However amazing your material situation is, understand that in the end, there is no objective purpose to life, and in the end, none of this matters. The meaning of life, is to create your own arbitrary meaning in it.

If you still want to cage yourself in the prison that society is, then you should still philosophymaxx because it will make you a more emotionally intelligent and wise person, because the skill of though provocation is something that will improve your life in many aspects, such as impressing employers in interviews, and having healthier relationships.
dnr
 
  • So Sad
Reactions: iloveboobs
who is your favourite philosopher?
That question, to me, is like asking 'who is your favourite scientist?' Yes, there would be ones we could be partial to, for their work in a specific field we are interested in, and their presentation of said work. We rarely appreciate the individual scientist, and often appreciate science as a whole, because what makes their work valuable is when other people are able to comment on it, peer review it, and collaborate on the same idea for future research, that then actually achieves technological progress. The same goes with philosophy, I like all philosophers for their work on bringing in different ideas to philosophy, and I think it would be disingenuous to prefer one over the other just because it aligns with my internal dispositions, as a confirmation bias safety.
 
  • +1
Reactions: twinkceluwu
That question, to me, is like asking 'who is your favourite scientist?' Yes, there would be ones we could be partial to, for their work in a specific field we are interested in, and their presentation of said work. We rarely appreciate the individual scientist, and often appreciate science as a whole, because what makes their work valuable is when other people are able to comment on it, peer review it, and collaborate on the same idea for future research, that then actually achieves technological progress. The same goes with philosophy, I like all philosophers for their work on bringing in different ideas to philosophy, and I think it would be disingenuous to prefer one over the other just because it aligns with my internal dispositions, as a confirmation bias safety.
great answer
 
  • +1
Reactions: TAChipmunk
You either choose to be alone or to be with others, if you choose the second option you're choosing to fit in. This world was made by other people through centuries, freedom nowadays is persecuted by the state and the values of society. You cannot escape, your identity depends on what you give to other people.

This mental illness that society is forces us to become important for something. Looks wouldn't matter much if we lived in a different era, same with money and popularity. Hierarchies creates contradictions, contradictions keep the system going on and on.
The duality of concepts is not a coincidence, it can be found in reality: pretty/ugly, short/tall, rich/poor and so on... One concept cannot sustain itself, a concept is a difference (it explains movement).
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: TAChipmunk
Any philosophers you would recommend reading?

Im still not bought on this purely mental aspect, I think life is dictated largely by experience and that we aren't at all abstract consciousness, so for example sating my actual urges is very satisfying because it falls within the parameters that my mind is guiding me towards. I'd be more content doing what I want even if what I want is shaped by whatever litany of factors that has affected my mind, and attempting to abstract myself from that I think is fruitless.

As for changing the parameters like you say with creating arbitrary meaning to your life or seeking happiness from within rather than without, I honestly have no idea how that works or how it would even appear.

The best example I could give is eating food, enslavement to sating that urge is entirely mental and entirely real because I can't abstract myself from what I already am.
 
2 iq wall of text 🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢
 
  • +1
Reactions: LuckyBeast
so we should just abandond trying to get hot women, looking better, being stronger, getting richer so that we can sit all day thinking about philosophical questions? im sorry nigga this is a bit cucked. some good points but we are made to want materialistic things
If you want materialistic things, then you will never stop wanting those things, and this regress becomes a bottomless pit. You crave such things to fill a void in your life, with the illusion that they will make you happy or more worthy.

You call people others copers for saying such things, but the real cope, is the fact that you are here and born to suffer as a man, and you distract yourself from this eventuality by filling your life with meaningless things, in an ironic attempt to bring meaning.
 
  • +1
Reactions: iloveboobs
If you want materialistic things, then you will never stop wanting those things, and this regress becomes a bottomless pit. You crave such things to fill a void in your life, with the illusion that they will make you happy or more worthy.

You call people others copers for saying such things, but the real cope, is the fact that you are here and born to suffer as a man, and you distract yourself from this eventuality by filling your life with meaningless things, in an ironic attempt to bring meaning.
Attempt to bring meaning when there's no meaning, in the realm of subjectivity nothing really holds your identity. Existencialism... You are just a result of what others did to you, it begins in the womb. If you were born as a subhuman there's no fix.
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: TAChipmunk
Any philosophers you would recommend reading?

Im still not bought on this purely mental aspect, I think life is dictated largely by experience and that we aren't at all abstract consciousness, so for example sating my actual urges is very satisfying because it falls within the parameters that my mind is guiding me towards. I'd be more content doing what I want even if what I want is shaped by whatever litany of factors that has affected my mind, and attempting to abstract myself from that I think is fruitless.

As for changing the parameters like you say with creating arbitrary meaning to your life or seeking happiness from within rather than without, I honestly have no idea how that works or how it would even appear.

The best example I could give is eating food, enslavement to sating that urge is entirely mental and entirely real because I can't abstract myself from what I already am.
My argument was mainly an antimaterialist existentialist critique of the black pill, because I believe this to be the root cause of most societal suffering. Separate from that is the idea of subscribing to other philosophical monisms as a way to live life and view it.

I don't view desire as inherently wrong, and fulfilling it as something wrong either, but when they have power over your mental state, this is what I believe is wrong. That's essentially Stoicism, but they don't use maximising pleasure as a guiding principle for living life, but rather a set of principles that should be present in us in dealing with things in our lives. These principles are considered to be timelessly virtuous. But since I've given a nihilist's depiction of the world, virtue in this case, is entirely subjective, because in the nihilist's mind, there is no permanence to anything. What then, should we orient our lives by, or look up to? Should we have a compass for the direction of our lives at all even if there is no point to anything?

Your last point is quite interesting. I would argue that the argument with food doesn't work, as we know that we need food to survive. This urge is a primal one, and is essential in giving our bodies a signal so powerful, that if it doesn't get that required thing, it will die, scientifically speaking. I agree with the Stoic concept of only needing enough, but nothing more. As I've made an axiom from the point of biology, another blackpiller could say 'well what about sex, surely that is an essential thing humans require, as it is our sole biological imperative is to reproduce and ensure the good survival and welfare of our species'. I think with this appeal to nature however, we can sort of flip the script and use this same rhetoric to make a strong case for living in line with natural harmony, which is what desire is ultimately.

Taoism has a pretty good answer for this in my opinion. This is not to say we should be guided by our desires in what hedonists desire, because the pursuit of pleasure leads to dismay. I think there is an important distinction between the desires of the soul, body, heart, and mind, and we have to nourish each appropriately with a set of ingredients tailored for each. In living with the Tao, with the example of eating food, you would not expend more energy in having a sense of guilt about sating your hunger with said food, but what you would consume, is ideally natural, and beneficial for your body.

Read all the philosophers. I enjoy all their works, and there is great content on Reddit and YouTube about all of this stuff. This is all thin conjecture at the end of the day, so explore it in the pleasure of expanding your mind and world, and becoming a more self-aware, content human being.
 
  • Ugh..
Reactions: NZb6Air

Similar threads

Funnyunenjoyer1
Discussion College is a scam
Replies
8
Views
84
Latinolooksmaxxer
Latinolooksmaxxer
PlayersGetPlayed
Replies
9
Views
199
moreroidsmoredates
moreroidsmoredates
shia.jihadist
Replies
9
Views
111
New Poster
New Poster
N
Replies
17
Views
107
Klasik616
Klasik616

Users who are viewing this thread

  • TAChipmunk
Back
Top