Nietzsche refined it.

I personally quite like summarisations, Philosophize This! It's good to refresh my memory and makes it easier to recall later. Sometimes I watch a video, or listen to a podcast, and then think "what did they talk about again?" It's typically the middle I forget. I don't really see anything wrong with summarising what you've said. Though if you could think of anything, I'd love to know.

what do you think about asceticism?

I got a glimpse into the nature of suffering a few moments ago. There's something vital to be learned about what suffering is and how it feels and would ideally feel if we gained absolute clarity. Unlike these philosophers who hit a dead end, philosophically speaking, like Schopenhauer and Wittgenstein, I'm finding that there's more and more stuff to uncover. Buddha was misguided and quite corrupted.

And these truths aren't something that cannot be spoken of. They're very tangible.

These are very important facts about life and maybe i shouldn't call them truth. Either way i have changed my opinion and now feel and think that there is something essential in reality to be discovered. I call it "ultimate knowledge", but with great care because this could be misinterpreted. Discard the word, once you you get a feel for what's being communicated (hopefully). I can never repay you, my friends! :')

I call it a dead end because they couldn't embody truth. I have immense reverence for Wittgenstein but he did the same mistake he.. i lost my train of thought. He said that he found many of the great philosophers to have made stupid mistakes which surprised him and disappointed him. He himself made mistakes of the same kind. I don't know how to quite describe it. The more deeper you go into truths the more fragile the process of thought becomes. Thought crumbles as you embody truth. And then you're left with choice of either embodying truth or continuing to think thus deviating from the truth. I hate how he brushed things aside by simply stating there are truths that one cannot speak of. The mistake he made, now that i remember it, is that he didn't bridge the gap between his mind and the world. I haven't either but i have recognised it as a possible path (actually it's the only path. it's the natural next step.) and am in the process of actualizing it. “An honest religious thinker is like a tightrope walker. He almost looks as though he were walking on nothing but air. His support is the slenderest imaginable. And yet it really is possible to walk on it.” ― Ludwig Wittgenstein His own words. Also, if you have to explain yourself then you are corrupted. Now, this could be because you are helpless against the flow of the world or it could be because you are afraid. I can't lie. I am fluctuating. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/aNWdbNd72Nnbe30.html Pardon me.

To make it clear, he was right about the nature of truths and that they cannot be spoken of but he didn't.. idk how to describe it. I haven't done my work yet. And i REALLY shouldn't be speaking or typing or doing much of anything other than my work until i have discovered everything there is to discover. For a normal person, my burden would be insanity. But, for me over the span of a decade and a half, it has become inescapable. I realise how crazy this is but i can't let go because slowly it's becoming less and less crazy. I'm drawn to it like moths to a flame. This is what he lacked, i think. I think he didn't distinguish, categorically, clearly enough, in his personal life, between what are these deep truths that cannot be spoken of and what's attainable given considerable thought. He failed to realise that he could have done so much more. Now, is this simply because he had very few peers in the way of resembling how he thought and functioned, back in his days? I think so. I think if Wittgenstein were born today he would definitely have figured out everything. In the current era, we have so many resources to use that make life incredibly easy and i mean the sheer amount of info that we have access to. He wouldn't have taken it for granted, not even close. He definitely would have ended the vicious cycle of life as we know and experience it. He ABSOLUTELY would have found a cure.

And to Steve: thank you for that Nietzsche twist at the end. It was completly necessary!

Kinda, yeah, but he included a lot of convoluted mumbo jumbo that can sometimes get in the way. No disrespect to him, it probably helped lots of Hindus feel comfortable believing in him, but Schopenhauer frames it in a way that modern Western intellectuals can appreciate. Schopenhauer also came to many of his conclusions independently from Eastern influence, which in my opinion speaks to its universality.