HighthreatPhilosopher - Friday, July 1st, 2011 - 12:17 AM
So i know a girl that is on the edge. Her life is pretty fucked up and she just wants her friends to be there for her. What do most of them do? Not only do they troll her day in and day out, they don't offer any comfort whatsoever. She cant even bring herself to delete them because she refuses to let them "win". This girl, a good GOOD friend of mine might end up killing herself, or drinking heavily or using narcotics just to feel better, yet these fuckfaces don't care they just want their cheap laughs. Can anyone explain why they are like that? Maybe something i can do to help her? Thankyou
The reason I suggested that approach is because it's what made me quit drinking. When you are attempting to help a person who is going through this sort of problem, you don't want to preach at them. That doesn't work, and it doesn't help in the least. You want to be able to show the person that the way they have chosen to deal with it is not a long term solution. Not judge them based on how they are doing it. (I know that you aren't, but that is most likely the way you came across because of her initial reaction.)
i have big plans for the future. i mean politically. i'm still too young, but i'm working on biting and clawing my way into congress, and from there i'll try and... mix things up.
i'm saying this because existentialist philosophy just... isn't necessary for me.
That just made me appreciate my life a hell lot more.
Also, here's the original site with those suicide notes: http://www.well.com/~art/suicidenotes.html The link that OP posted is one of those stupid social media blogs that steals and reposts content and make money off of ad revenue. They're easy to find because they usually have a fuckton of links to other similar blogs somewhere on the page with large thumbnails and misleading titles.
Ranked #12 in Empire magazine's "The 100 Best Films Of World Cinema" in 2010.
In a futuristic city sharply divided between the working class and the city planners, the son of the city's mastermind falls in love with a working class prophet who predicts the coming of a savior to mediate their differences.
People seem to either hate or love this film. It is a darling of conspiracy theories but I would love to hear the opinions of others which is why this is on Philosophy.
I ask a simple question that has puzzled me for some time now, and please do not see it as any reason to be concerned or alarmed, it is just a perspective of existence and of life.
Why have I not ended my life, and decided to assure my safety until the day my life involuntarily ends?
I am absolutely confused as to why I am still here, even though my life will amount to nothing, and my legacy will eventually die out. I am no history-changer, nor a pivotal role in anything of importance, so why do I continue to exist as a conscious mass? I have yet to find any justification to live, but I cannot find a single reason to die, so I am distraught in this struggle between differentiating the insignificance of life and the futility of death.
No. 18799 - MyotishiaGuardian - May 3rd, 2011 - 9:49 AM
It could be said that it is because in death there is the ultimate unknown. And humans, though curious about it, fear the unknown. We spend our lives making things safe and trying to understand things we do not as it gives us security.
This is why many do not simply end their lives.
And life is not as empty as many seem to think. We do little things that make the world different and interesting every day. We mould our world around us.
Finding what we have moulded our world into at the end seems reason enough to live.
well, the way i see it, if you can actually form and think this question, then you're real enough.
and besides what would one do if it's not?
go on some crazy adventure to save the world, only to discover that reality is much worse?
it's an eternal question. the answer just depends on how much you want the truth and freedom.
besides, freedom might suck.
I think there is a strong chance that reality is not what it seems like. We miss alot of information in our everday waking consciousness (UV waves, Infrared) but are able to detect their presence through science. It is just that our brains percieve what is useful to our survival as a species, and blocks out everything else. Human consciousness is only a type of consciousness. Many different animals percieve reality in very different ways, and it does not make it any less real (bats with ecolocation, sharks detect electric fields). It seems that different types of consciousness can be manifested in different physical systems. Studies in quantum physicis have already suggested that the our concept of time is an illusion, and well as there being multiple realities other than the one we currently experience now. Its all about missed information filtered through what drives our consciousness, which is the human brain.
/ph/, I pose to you a question:
If knowledge is power, and power corrupts, does this mean that knowledge corrupts?
Consider it, our knowledge has caused advancements, and our advancements have generally spawned more problems. Wars and genocides have happened over things we have learned. To top it off, the stupidest, most ignorant people are generally happier.
Please /ph/, prove me wrong. I hate the idea that all of our advancements are only making things worse, but the more I think about it, the truer it seems...
The one who realizes that existence is not serious and there is nothing sacred. The one who realizes that life is happening now, not to come in some neatly gift-wrapped future or some described destiny after death.
"Can art be taught?"A basic question that requires more elaboration. The first question to this would have to be "what is art?" The second question is how does one effectively decide between good art and bad art?. Does good art depend on superior "line quality" or rather by the function a piece might play in a society? If one honestly wants to become an artist, would going to an art school be the best course of action? To me it seems that art and philosophy of art have had no clear definition, and that its roots since the 20th century are mainly based on divergent thinking. Art is certainly an attempt at communication, however can it be taught? This I feel is an important question, especially to the popularity of art majors and art degrees in 4-year universities as well as trade schools. Anyways, I want to here some well thought out replies on whether art can be taught.