After 7 years, I was burned out by philosophy, yet I continued to haunt the philosophy section in search for anything radical and profound. Amidst the expected titles commonly found at any bookstore, sat A Short History of Decay. I pulled it off the shelf in the faint hopes of killing time until the cigar shop opened in 20 minutes. After a couple of hours disappeared savoring the salacious prose, I begrudgingly closed the book and hurried to the checkout counter, cackling in glee in the wonderful fortune of uncovering a new thinker that spoke blasphemous music to my eyes.
In the past, I’ve wondered a bit about this so-called “white guilt” that has passed for the collective guilt of people who are uncomfortable with their luxurious lives. I think I understand it, but I think its time has passed, and should no longer be credible. I believe that it is a form of narcissism: people crow on how deeply they feel about things they NEVER did. The secret to this type of guilt: in order to feel good about yourself, just feel bad about yourself. Continue reading White guilt
In this blog I will be drawing a distinction between two philosophies – one espoused by Kaeli and her guru, Cartaphilus, and the other, by the Elder gods. (Click here for Part 2) Hopefully this will explain how Kaeli’s worldview compares and contrasts with those of the elder gods.
The insurgents Kaeli’s innermost beliefs are buttressed and articulated by the radical ideas of the anarchist, Cartaphilus. The elder gods, on the other hand, serve as the antithesis to her defiant stand, as the wizened cynics who disdain the fervor of youth. Continue reading Philosophy of the gods, part 1
This essay seeks to compare and contrast Schopenhauer and Nietzsche by putting their philosophies of pessimism and optimism in high relief. In relying on Georg Simmel’s analysis, I suspect I may have caricatured Nietzsche in order to write a balanced essay, so feel free to disregard this as an adequate representation of Nietzsche’s multifaceted philosophy. It was originally written for a friend who argued that I had no reason of siding with Schopenhauer over Nietzsche, and it became a lengthy analysis of optimism and pessimism. Continue reading Optimism/Pessimism: Schopenhauer vs Nietzsche
The title of this blog is but a poor attempt to capture Nietzsche’s contemptuous summation from his attempt at self-critique of Birth of Tragedy: a mere fabrication for purposes of gulling: at best, an artistic fiction; at worst, an outrageous imposture.
I agree that devil’s advocacy in no way indicates the position they hold, but this misunderstands the philosophy as autobiography maxim. That one may take positions one doesn’t actually hold does not militate against the confession thesis, for the reasons of their advocacy remains the same as if they were advocating their own beliefs. If one were to be an incorrigible devil’s advocate, he would be an anarchic epistemologist who thinks all positions deserve advocacy, and that would be a position of its own open to the confession charge about his own beliefs regarding positions and ideas. Continue reading Reading philosophy as confession
The majority of people are so afraid of the possibility that life has no meaning, that it lacks any intrinsic worth whatsoever. This nihilism, due to the fear of the inevitability of meaningless suffering, is bolstered by the modern scientific view of the human species as just the “moldy film” of a tiny planet orbiting a very ordinary star in a ocean of billion of stars in a very ordinary galaxy in a cosmos of billion galaxies. Continue reading Nihilism, anyone?