What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Philosophy 1: Wittgenstein was a beery swine who was just as sloshed as Schlegel

"Life is the sum of all your choices. So what are you doing today?"- Camus
A. I would like this in a tattoo.

B. I really want to send this to those I vote for (yes, I vote D.)
 
n7h91ju4rr081.jpg
 
A pop love song about Wittgenstein. No, really.

My friend is studying philosophy.

She specializes in Wittgenstein.

And whenever I tell her I love her

She tells me that this is not true.

She says:

How can you be sure that you love me when Wittgenstein says that it's not even certain that the world exists at all?!

When Wittgenstein says

When Wittgenstein says

Or was it Russell, or was it Kant?

No, I think it was Wittgenstein.

- - - -

There are pictures of Wittgenstein on her wall

And they convey the impression

That Wittgenstein was a rather sad man.

And I can understand that, because he always worked so hard at his desk.

And, then, he did find out that the world is all that which is the case.

OK, I can't help myself: I'm not particularly impressed with that either.

And then she says to me:

You see, that's always the problem with you, you are always so arrogant, you're always so sure, but how can you be sure that you love me when Wittgenstein says that it's not even certain that the world exists at all?!

When Wittgenstein says

When Wittgenstein says

Or was it Russell, or was it Kant? (...)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I was perusing YouTube tonight and one channel had Jordan Peterson as a "philosopher."

Didn't watch the video, knowing it was misogynistic tripe, but I need to know what the people who run that channel are smoking and why they're not sharing.
 
MissThundercat said:
I was perusing YouTube tonight and one channel had Jordan Peterson as a "philosopher."

Didn't watch the video, knowing it was misogynistic tripe, but I need to know what the people who run that channel are smoking and why they're not sharing.
Click to expand...

The Succession Jordan Peterson character is amazing.
 
How each portion of the quad chart perceives each portion of the quad chart?

top left: left authoritarian (Tankies)
top right: right authoritarian (Stephen Miller)
bottom left: left libertarian (Andrew Yang)
bottom right: right libertarian (Rand Paul)

For example:
left authoritarians see left libertarians as useful idiots;
right authoritarians see right libertarians as amoral mercenaries;
left libertarians see right libertarians as quirky fascism <-- this one doesn't really work, it's more plutocratic anarchists
 
Last edited:
It's really good, especially when someone thinks they found their home quadrant and realize it's not the baseline. I briefly fell into that same trap initially when I looked at the red square (clever).
 
dxmnkd316 said:
It's really good, especially when someone thinks they found their home quadrant and realize it's not the baseline. I briefly fell into that same trap initially when I looked at the red square (clever).
Click to expand...

As a green square starting to migrate towards the red square because Jesus Fuck people will hang themselves for a bauble, I know what you mean.

Personally I could live with an America that gently oscillates between the other three squares after we agree to deport all the blues.
 
In my downtime at work tonight, I read a lot of Foucault. Taking on a career of advocacy and activism, I plan to read more of him.
 
Knowledge doesn't really form part of human nature. Conflict, combat, the outcome of the combat, and, consequently, risk and chance are what gives rise to knowledge. Knowledge is not instinctive; it is counter instinctive, just as it is not natural but counter natural.

Michel Foucault
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top