Spirituality, Religion, Theology and Philosophy


All faiths & lack of faiths welcome.
All debate styles welcome.
WARNING: Posts may contain sensitive and controversial material.
Is philosophy pretentious?
Posted: Posted February 15th
Edited February 15th by Louis De Pointe du Lac

The very thought that one can just ponder the mysteries of existence and come to some interesting conclusions. Sometimes I think it's almost as bad as assuming god talks to you.

But then of course the paradox is obvious. This too could be considered a philosophy.

settingsOptions
There are 34 Replies

Given that all thought leads to some philosophy when pursued to any notable depth, all thought is pretentious. In other words: yes, but it's a pointless distinction.

Posted February 15th by nullfather
nullfather

This too could be considered a philosophy.

Nihilism is a philosophy, yes.

Sometimes I think it's almost as bad as assuming god talks to you.

Honestly though what's so bad about this if you have reasons to believe that beyond just hearing a voice? At least, with a lower-case g god.

Edited February 15th by KnokkelMillennium
KnokkelMillennium

Philosophy poses tons of questions that don't often lead to definitive answers.

Posted February 15th by Kaot0
Kaot0

Nothing is pretentious until it purports to have a deeper significance than it does, so if philosophy is pretentious, it's your fault.

Posted February 15th by Pink Peruvian Flying Bear
Pink Peruvian Flying Bear

Nothing is pretentious until it purports to have a deeper significance than it does, so if philosophy is pretentious, it's your fault.

Nothing is my fault. *sips margarita while wearing a scarf in the summer time*

Well ok let me put it this way. Does a philosopher, in thinking it fruitful for a few primates on a random little planet to ponder the heart and soul of a cosmos with billions of light years worth of wonder and power, purport to have a deeper significance than he or she really does?

Philosophy poses tons of questions that don't often lead to definitive answers.

Without a doubt. That's why I went with soft nihilism and settled with "well I don't know for sure if anything has a grand meaning to it."

Honestly though what's so bad about this if you have reasons to believe that beyond just hearing a voice? At least, with a lower-case g god.

Well if you have legitimate reasons to believe it then there's nothing bad about it at all.

Given that all thought leads to some philosophy when pursued to any notable depth, all thought is pretentious. In other words: yes, but it's a pointless distinction.

A vice that can't be avoided is no vice at all? Yea, I thought about that and I think I agree. So long as you think of philosophy as an exercise or a sport and not an epiphany that was given to you from on high, calling it pretentious may be unfair.

Posted February 15th by Louis De Pointe du Lac
Louis De Pointe du Lac
No love = No future

Well ok let me put it this way. Does a philosopher, in thinking it fruitful for a few primates on a random little planet to ponder the heart and soul of a cosmos with billions of light years worth of wonder and power, purport to have a deeper significance than he or she really does?

Let me answer that question with another question: do you really have anything better to do?

Posted February 15th by Pink Peruvian Flying Bear
Pink Peruvian Flying Bear

Considering the same men who dreamt up philosophy also dreamt up things science proved wrong, I wouldn't say it's NOT pretentious, if my life depended on giving the right answer. Assuming to know how people should live their lives is ridiculous, but that doesn't make the entire field useless. Jesus preached the golden rule and by all accounts we was a selfless individual, aside from the whole proclaiming to be the son of God thing. But the ancient Greeks were pretentious as hell.

Posted February 15th by mariomguy
mariomguy

Let me answer that question with another question: do you really have anything better to do?

I don't see how whether or not he or she has anything better to do answers the question of whether he or she thinks it's fruitful. Pretentious is still pretentious even if you're bored.

Assuming to know how people should live their lives is ridiculous, but that doesn't make the entire field useless.

Agreed.

But the ancient Greeks were pretentious as hell.

Pretentious.......... THIS! IS! yea no I'm not finishing that ;)

Edited February 15th by Louis De Pointe du Lac
Louis De Pointe du Lac
No love = No future

I don't see how whether or not he or she has anything better to do answers the question of whether he or she thinks it's fruitful. Pretentious is still pretentious even if you're bored.

What I mean is, if we accept that there are no higher beings than ourselves, no higher forces at work than our own minds, then we have to work out higher meaning for ourselves some way, even if that higher meaning is that there is none.

Philosophy lead to the theology that built civilization, and philosophy let us dismantle theology when it became obsolete (admittedly, the cleanup is taking some time). In that sense, it's the scaffolding of society. In no way is that pretentious.

Posted February 16th by Pink Peruvian Flying Bear
Pink Peruvian Flying Bear

Fair enough.

Posted February 16th by Louis De Pointe du Lac
Louis De Pointe du Lac
No love = No future

I think that it's pretentious to assume God *doesn't* talk to some people. I think it's pretentious to assume that everybody is automatically insane if they don't see things a particular way. I also think it's pretentious to use the word "obvious" when one cannot tell the difference between what one sees and what one *wants* to see.

Edited February 16th by GC/MS
GC/MS
 

But then of course the paradox is obvious. This too could be considered a philosophy.

I always come back to this paradox when I question my own beliefs. If all philosophies are fantasy, then the philosophy of realism is also fantasy, but in this case maybe a less enjoyable fantasy.

Edited February 17th by Xhin
Xhin
 

What I mean is, if we accept that there are no higher beings than ourselves, no higher forces at work than our own minds,

Why do you assume that people accept that?

Edited February 17th by Xhin
Xhin
 

"Why do you assume that people accept that?"

because the people who don't accept that don't matter lmao omg edge

Posted February 17th by poptart!
poptart!
 

Why do you assume that people accept that?

'Cause it's the spirituality forum, and nearly everyone here does.

On the other hand, if we do believe in a higher power or even something that could be called God, discovering the exact nature of that entity is, in itself, philosophy.

Posted February 17th by Pink Peruvian Flying Bear
Pink Peruvian Flying Bear

'Cause it's the spirituality forum, and nearly everyone here does.

Have you been duly authorized to speak for EVERYBODY here? I know I didn't authorize you. But of course. I'm religious, and you automatically discount everything I say before I've even said it. (Tell me I'm wrong)

because the people who don't accept that don't matter lmao omg edge

What's that supposed to mean? "Maximum pwnage renders me the bearer of law"?

Posted March 1st by GC/MS
GC/MS
 

Have you been duly authorized to speak for EVERYBODY here? I know I didn't authorize you. But of course. I'm religious, and you automatically discount everything I say before I've even said it. (Tell me I'm wrong)

I've been authorized to speak for everybody by the Church of Dawkins. You are correct. Hail Satan.

Posted March 1st by Pink Peruvian Flying Bear
Pink Peruvian Flying Bear

Sarcasm, the last refuge of a person who can't think of anything witty to say.

I'm just saying, how do you know that some people don't speak to God? Of course, you put your foot down and state that God definitely doesn't exist, even though science has said no such thing.

Posted March 15th by GC/MS
GC/MS
 

Sarcasm is pretty damn witty.

Posted March 16th by Malas
Malas
 

Have you been duly authorized to speak for EVERYBODY here?


To be a little fair, he did say "nearly everyone," and not "EVERYBODY."

Edited March 16th by Jet Presto
Jet Presto

Sarcasm is actually against my religion. Father DeGrasse Tyson declared it to be haram in 2013. I know that no one speaks to God anymore, because it is The Current Year, and if they did purport to in public we would put them to the sword.

Posted March 16th by Pink Peruvian Flying Bear
Pink Peruvian Flying Bear

Sarcasm is not witty at all.

And you can't prove me wrong by making cutting remarks, no matter how the internet might tell you otherwise.

Posted March 27th by GC/MS
GC/MS
 

I honestly don't know what you're talking about, heretic.

Posted March 28th by Pink Peruvian Flying Bear
Pink Peruvian Flying Bear

Just because you say that, doesn't mean I am wrong, it just means you need to pay more attention.

Posted March 29th by GC/MS
GC/MS
 

You seem very, very secure in your beliefs. I mean that, it's impressive.

Posted March 29th by Pink Peruvian Flying Bear
Pink Peruvian Flying Bear

And therein lies the rub, doesn't it? You don't know what I know. You haven't experienced what I have experienced. You think everything I believe in is actually mental illness. Based on what? Because it SEEMS that way. That's what all of the strife on this page between the atheists and I is founded upon. You not only know nothing about me and my religion, you don't want to know. Yet somehow you think you have cause to judge me based not on what IS, but what it SEEMS to be. That's horrendously insufficient. And the crux of the matter is, you don't care.

Posted March 31st by GC/MS
GC/MS
 

And the crux of the matter is, you don't care.

It's actually against our religion to learn about other religions. It's nothing personal, heretic.

Posted March 31st by Pink Peruvian Flying Bear
Pink Peruvian Flying Bear

And more witless sarcasm. It's almost as if you don't want anybody to take you seriously. Or, at least, don't want to win an argument.

Posted April 4th by GC/MS
GC/MS
 

We prefer to think of them as "prospective confessionals."

Posted April 4th by Pink Peruvian Flying Bear
Pink Peruvian Flying Bear

Somebody in the government would like to call that an "alternative fact"

Posted April 5th by GC/MS
GC/MS
 

PPFB is being really witty. You're not.

Posted April 21st by Malas
Malas
 

Just because you think that doesn't mean he's winning. People win arguments by being right, not by being witty, despite what the internet will tell you.

Posted April 26th by GC/MS
GC/MS
 

I don't want to win any arguments, I just want to laugh. Right now I'm laughing. At you.

Posted April 27th by Malas
Malas
 

Go right ahead. It doesn't make him(or you) right. I don't have an ego so fragile that I'm going to lose my cool just because you don't like me. I don't care. I'm here to prove to everybody why I'm right, not to win popularity contests. If you're here to judge popularity contests, you're off-topic. If you're here to throw your support behind someone's argument solely because you think he's doing it in an entertaining fashion, then you're doing it wrong.

Posted April 29th by GC/MS
GC/MS
 
Reply to: Is philosophy pretentious?

Enter your message here


Site Rules | Complaints Process | Register Complaint Facebook Page
GTX0 © 2009-2017 Xhin GameTalk © 1999-2008 lives on