He is correct.

@@samwayes even worse, a Danzig Bag boy...

Hey can I read it

I'd be interested in reading it as well

@piggypigpig If he just wrote a Master's Thesis, I'm fine with him "bragging" (which I don't think he was even doing). He's absolutely earned the right to take pride in what he's done.

Amen

Then study the difference between a conservative and a mass consumer.

Then study the difference between a conservative and a mass consumer.

That's just one reason that I love the guy..

And those wet markets in Asia are what, an example of Eastern compassion and civility?

but still..wanting not to want can be pretty hellish

Now listen to Everywhere at the End of Time.

@@turgorojare575 wanting is as easy to set aside as a hat hen ou realize your soul is at stake.

@@turgorojare575 wanting is as easy to set aside as a hat when youu realize your soul is at stake.

Beautifully captured in a comment. Bravo fellow human. 🤌🌲

Same, dude. They're such a gift.

Deep

Edgy af...

☝️ no one asked for your input

One must imagine sisypus as happy

Thats exactly where Schopenhauer extracted his ideas from, likewise in some part I see a lot of Avicenna in Kant also.

Objective reality is that which doesn't go away when nothing is left to observe it. So we will never know how reality works. Science has proven the mere act of observation changes the results of tests. We literally cannot know reality for what it truly is.

Is there reality, something objective outside the mind? Yes. It’s the whole “if a tree falls in the wood and no ones there, does it make a sound.” Experience may interpret reality, but a reality is there nonetheless, even if the person is blind deaf and dumb.

@@SDSen schopy learnt about eastern philosophy after he wrote his book

@Myrmadon no, only the 'world' as we know it. 'earth' is not a noumenal concept, without interpretation, it is just there; with no outside names, attributes, or anything.

Thank you! That was a very lucid comment, I appreciate it.

I enjoyed reading the distinction you drew between philosophy and religion and I am assuredly in agreement. If I may, I would like to cut out the verbiage and get to the core of the matter. Philosophy is honest enquiry. Religion is dishonest dishonest enquiry designed to gain ownership of your mind with the ultimate goal of cashing in on your financial assets.

The most beautiful thing I've ever read on youtube my entire life. I must, however, offer an amendment. What you described as religion was merely Abrahamic

+Tony Learner Funny enough, religions of past seem to not only have philosophies but seem to point at the stars describing their "heavenly" movements. Was eye opening when I saw that. Perhaps less so the religion and more so the books and "mythologies" by which they were based on.

You should read Nietzsche or Jung. While it's obvious that religion and philosophy come from the same boat, you'll understand that the nature of every information is subjectiv and thus not true. Which is why that religion simply can't be true. Yet this information about how our conciousness itself works is a philosophical description yet rather the only "objectiv" information we can achieve threwout the pure logical thinking nature that is us. So, NO, religion and philosophy are not the same coin. Religion is simply a subjectiv construct and philosophy a concious explaination from within.

Kay El quatsch

Because it doesn't matter

Really how do you know ?

The Holy spirit is given to us as a helper ,that's our conscience . Not demonic.

He sees that there is no glass as such

I think we should see the full half of the cup but not ignore the issues of the world

As Rust Cohle said in True Detective, he's a realist but in philosophical terms, a pessimist. There's a difference between the philosophical and colloquial definitions. An optimist is often guided by religious and/or idealist assumptions to see the universe in a non-pessimistic/realistic/factual light. Like Leibniz was an optimist but unlike pessimists, he starts off by making an assumption that a benevolent, omniscient and omnipotent God exits as a creator. Pessimists don't make this assumption and this makes their worldview seem bleaker in comparison.

You're *_not_* an optimist or pessimist based solely on how you view the world. It's determined also by how you act, assuming you act coherently. If you see the glass as half-full and you move on, good for you. That's a positive attitude. Now, if you see _every_ glass as half-full and you don't surrender to despair and decide to die, you either are a masochist or very positive. To see *all* the suffering in the world and press on in spite of it could indicate a few things: 1. You're a masochist and/or sadist. 2. You're a strong and _hopeful_ person (what good would it do you to live on in such a world if it were irredeemable?). 3. You just haven't considered what follows logically.

He was definitely a pessimist, not in the sense that he was pessimistic as an emotion but he was a philosophical pessimist.

Thanks, will do

same

Jewish Supremacy brought me here..

@@someguyio3654 Well hopefully you continue to use these resources learn and move away from such childish thoughts.

@@jakenorton7854 Over a million Iraqi’s are dead because of a document called, “clean break” which was written by dual-Israeli Citizens over at a think-tank called, project for a New American Century which not only set the Bush Administration’s Policy in the Middle East but Obama as well. Seems you could stand to do some research as to whom sets genocidal policy in the Middle East. Or you could just regularly read Haaretz, The Times of Israel, etc.. They openly brag about Jewish Power but that would take a commitment or self-responsibility to be an ETHICAL.... Informed citizen, clearly you are not willing but everyone receives judgment at some point.

sort of... more like an invisible river that your in, an undertow that carries you to survive, reproduce, and keep evolving and adapting. your personal thoughts, dreams, happiness and sadness are just a distraction from this truth. we believe we have free will, but we don't, we all are dragged along with the river 'the will". this includes everything from a human to a bacterial disease, all the same. sadly, the human has managed to evolve far enough to be able to reflect on this unpleasant truth. So, it only leaves two options- physical suicide... or psychological suicide such as religion, consumerism, etc. Albert Camus has the only decent answer to this human problem as far as I can tell... embrace the absurdity of life for what it is. Well, after that, I guess try and enjoy your day my fellow screwed human friend. lol

i would call it a realistic non-sugar coated taste.

@@serenity748 Pessimism =/= realism

Origins my friend. A good start usually ends inadequate and a bad start leads to a better end. Ideally speaking, if you aren't killed or die young in which case Schopenhauer's representation and pessimism come to pass.

Penis 🧐

Can you elaborate ? How do you see Schop's "Will" as parallel to the Tao ? Tao or "The Way" or in practice the 'way of balance'; it "Is" or "isness" or short hand 'it is what it it'. "Beingness". Whereas the goal is to become one with the Tao : The "Will" as presented above is to be escaped from. I do see the similarity of Buddhism and Schopenhauer's Will in that 'life is suffering' and we should seek to end suffering or escape it. You could almost substitute the Will for the Ego in Buddhism. Also Hinduism seeking to escape the endless wheel of life and death by evolving spiritually through repetitive incarnations. I don't know Schopenhauer but in the video it is stated that it is desirable to escape the Will but it doesn't suggest how to do that (yet). Reminds me of Freud's ego/ID concept used to explain our mind (self) via dichotomy. An invention. The ego is to be subdued in psychology as well as in (a different way in) Buddhism. Like 'ego' is the source of all evil. In the presentation Will seems a awful lot like 'ego' in Buddhism and ID in Freud. If you don't mind using artificial concepts and dichotomies to understand reality . Eastern philosophies / religious thought depict reality as all one thing in different forms (which relates to Zen ; Yin Yang in which reality and the way we perceive it appears to be separate things but in essence are all only one thing (and "thou are that" as Joseph Campbell might say or as the Tao would say; or even the Upanishads). There are lot's of connections to be made : Darwin and the misrepresented "survival of species" ie., survival of the fittest. The Will appears as part of the drive to survive but can't distinguish survival from conquest. According to Wikipedia "...the object of spiritual practice is to 'become one with the tao' (Tao Te Ching) or to harmonise one's will with Nature (cf. Stoicism) in order to achieve 'effortless action' (Wu wei). This involves meditative and moral practices." (Wikipedia). 'Virtue is an intrinsic concept in Taoism.' Morality aside for the moment : Taoism seems to want to take advantage the subtle cues in the reality we perceive 'out there' (in reality land ; so to speak) and the reality we perceive within. Existence is a metaphor within a paradox within an enigma. We are constantly trying to make sense of it. The Tao seems to say 'observe' and existence will reveal it's truth to you. Buddhism ; be quiet and know (rein in the ego and the truth will reveal itself in silence). All metaphors ; concepts, to simplify something that is beyond our understanding. As Yang to this Yin ; western thought tends to try and over complicate things to the point of nonsense. It's quite a statement to be making that a genius of the caliber of Schopenhauer is spouting nonsense so I will duck and cover now. The "Will" in Schop's diatribe seems to be the 'devil that made me do it' ! The Will is to be cut out, exercised ; like Freud's ID. While Jung suggested embracing the shadow and integrating rather than rejecting parts of ourselves that we deem unacceptable. Of course Jung studied Eastern thought, philosophy, religion/ mysticism. There is much that is very Taoist in nature in Jung's thought. I've always found it problematic to cut out a part or parts of the self for exile or extermination or repression. The idea that there are integral aspects of our being which we perceive to be holding us back from real spiritual advancement is a little hard for me to accept. The fact is that we have all the spiritual enlightenment we can use if we just realize and know it or as some would say 'awaken' to it. That there are good guys and bad guys within us and the bad needs to be eliminated and the good inflated just tells me we don't understand these aspects of ourselves well enough and I also have a problem tossing out something I might need later. It seems to me that whatever we find in there ; it belongs to us and there is a reason and purpose for it that we simply need to figure out the optimal use for. "Chi" or life force or flow of universal energy is part of learning the Tao. It is rather an inclusive concept as opposed to a dichotomy as western thought tends to lean towards. So, finding a parallel between The Tao and the Will seems to me a difficult yet important matter. Will is the Ego that Buddha wants to allow yet go beyond ; the little self (the false self) as opposed to connecting with the greater enlightened (true) self where you see and understand your connection to all things. Where you connect to God Consciousness ; if you will. Will is the evil / ID self that Freud wanted to expose and repress. Will is the hero of Nietzsche's scenario and he says revel in it. There is a certain sense that nothing is true in heaven or earth yet willing makes it so. It is largely to the benefit of those who espouse it but there is an entire school of thought or neo/ 'commercialized' spirituality that claims that you will your reality into being. There is some support for this idea in the field of Quantum Mechanics (theories). The double slit theory in which it is shown that the consciousness (will) of the observer effects the outcome of the experiment. If the mind (or will) can effect the behavior of quantum particles is it far fetched to speculate about the possibilities surrounding the super collider experiments in which scientists are searching to understand the point at which nothing becomes something ; is it possible that it will turn out that the Will will have some effect there ? I would suspect as anyone would that the Tao and Quantum Physics have a lot in common. Where our consciousness has a connection or interrelationship is yet to be discovered ; I hope we are on the threshold. Grounded: Centered: Balanced.

People have infinite opportunity to think for themselves.

I'll see your introduction to Schopenhauer video, and raise you a video only about Kant.

+Donza Thompson Nice.

+Donza Thompson then the good life is simply...leave society ...now or later

Donza - What you've stated is unknowable from our limited perspective.

🤣

Agreed. I vaguely recall Spinoza describing God/Nature as indifferent to life. It just is.

He does reference directly Spinoza though.

They meant the same. Spinoza can more likely be described as a panentheistic rather than pantheistic...as for schoppy, he hit the nail on the head..only if people who ‘seek’ truth for once actually stop romanticising their innate ‘will to live’ and be ready to accept what is as is without attaching labels...