if people who talk about philosophy are so smart, why aren’t they rich?

[i wanna be a bimbo doll]

Philosophy supposedly is about solving questions and being able to see the reality about things.

So if you’re so good at that why don’t you solve the fact your poor and no one like you first? Buying a stock that goes 100x in value would prove that you can see the truth about the world (that others can’t) - while most philosophical questions few people care about and those that do havent solved since the days men wore white dresses and women wore all fur. 

- The reason the “toga” wearing men talked about that stuff is the same reason you wear Chanel. It’s a status signal too show you are rich enough you don’t have too spend your time on anything “practical” or “real problems”   

A lot of these people seem too pride themselves on having “arguments no one has ever debunked” usually something like “people only respond with ab-libednens or emotional appeals because my logic is airtight”

I have one of those too:

“God isn’t (not) real just because you’re ugly”

The tone i say it in is like “I don’t eat charred animal remains” both so it has a statement quality and shows flippancy/ indifference - but at the same time requires a response.

No one as of today has been able to contest my logic so I assume it’s a truth they don’t want to confront out of fear that their worldview will crumble like a cookie. Still waiting for my undefeated position on the philosophy leaderboard

[Munificent]

I dont wear Chanel

[cryingIRL]

philosophy is not a science, it is proof that those people have failed at being smart.

[Altruist]

philosophy is not a science, it is proof that those people have failed at being smart.

[prince of shitskins]

Most conversations have philosophical undertones, nobody who has any self awareness would proclaim themselves as a philospher. Its usually an honorary title given to no talent eccentrics who make make it into the spotlight for whatever reason, kind of like jesus or mohammed - what did they actually do? at least hitler did some paintings

[Altruist]

Most conversations have philosophical undertones, nobody who has any self awareness would proclaim themselves as a philospher. Its usually an honorary title given to no talent eccentrics who make make it into the spotlight for whatever reason, kind of like jesus or mohammed - what did they actually do? at least hitler did some paintings

Great post

[prince of shitskins]

Great post

Just saw this on a 4chan ad





Thought it was comedy at first, but he's being completely sincere. Not sure if that makes it funnier, the clown really thinks he's going to be in history books 1000 years from now

[slop slinger]

I wonder why philosophers became such a pinata to hit on these websites instead of say, anthroologists or sociologists or literary theorists or art historians lol

[Altruist]

I wonder why philosophers became such a pinata to hit on these websites instead of say, anthroologists or sociologists or literary theorists or art historians lol

those other guys are already universally considered to be jokes

their fields are so comically worthless that not  even the "best" among them dare to larp as intellectual, or authorities of any kind

also, comparative anything is below 0. at my law school (law is not much better, but at least it has actual impact on societies that's not completely imaginary), most professors didnt even allow students to write papers on comparative law. muh, here are a, b and c, a is different from b and c because ..., b is different from a and c because ..., btw, there is also d

[slop slinger]

those other guys are already universally considered to be jokes

their fields are so comically worthless that not  even the "best" among them dare to larp as intellectual, or authorities of any kind

also, comparative anything is below 0. at my law school (law is not much better, but at least it has actual impact on societies that's not completely imaginary), most professors didnt even allow students to write papers on comparative law. muh, here are a, b and c, a is different from b and c because ..., b is different from a and c because ..., btw, there is also d

Oh ok and philisophers arent already considered jokes

You dig yourself the weirdest holes

[Altruist]

Oh ok and philisophers arent already considered jokes

You dig yourself the weirdest holes

obviously there is a difference between being a joke and being overrated

[slop slinger]

obviously there is a difference between being a joke and being overrated

yeah. obviously. 
how might we differentiate these two ontological categories from other three other ones well known in the literature: "being a piece of shit," "being kind of a piece of shit," and "being a nimrod"?

[Honest]

The OP question itself is philosophical.

Raging about philosophy (why do they spend so much time discussing pointless ideas?) is like a nerd raging about sports (why do they spend so much time trying to kick a ball into a net?). The simple fact is that different people enjoy different things. Someone that's into philosophy isn't necessarily smart, in the same way that a guy who's into football isn't necessarily healthy.

[Honest]

I wonder why philosophers became such a pinata to hit on these websites instead of say, anthroologists or sociologists or literary theorists or art historians lol

Most users of these kinds of forums have philosophical inclinations, but are afraid to pursue them due to culture of anti-intellectualism. The result is a classic case of sour grapes.

[slop slinger]

Most users of these kinds of forums have philosophical inclinations, but are afraid to pursue them due to culture of anti-intellectualism. The result is a classic case of sour grapes.