is this relevant at all?

Yes

>>1462589
Level 2 spotted

TLDR too much autism in the picture OP

Looks like level 6 here. I've actually gone through level 1-6.

Most likely wont graduate from level 6.

I'm level 4(except the hedonism) leaning to level 6, but I think 4 should be level 5 as 5 is bullshit mental gymnastics around existential void out of fear. level infinite is also bullshit it implies a demigod level which not even Jesus was, even had pretty much Buddhist ideals. the other levels are pretty on point.

File: smert.png (63KB, 564x78px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 564x78px

Is this how people rationalise their "magic feelies" now?
Simply redefine rational thought into "just another faith-belief" because they can't cope? Damn.

Explain to me the difference between level 6 and level 0 (just those two) besides the fact one is a lot more "religious" than the other. They seem to say the same message, but level 6 says it a lot less hopeful.

>>1462769
he who does not have ears to hear

>>1462564
It's one of those "spiritualism" memes that the people on this board use to normalize their /rel/posting.

>>1462769
>>1462802
level 2 detected

I make up my own religion which changes on the daily. Where does that place me?

Humanities were a mistake

>>1462564
>modern existentialism
As opposed to what, ancient existentialism? Sloppy use of the word "modern" is the biggest giveaway that someone has no idea what the fuck they're talking about.

>>1462564
>implying you can express the later levels with mere words
This scale itself a joke

>>1462564
So the lowest level is believing in hibbity jibbity, and the highest level is believing in pretentious hibbity jibbity?

>>1465557
>le pretentious maymay

Literally a pleb marker

>>1465569
>hurrr durrr my consciousness is higher than other mortals
It's no different than the fedora being euphoric by his own enlightenment. Aka pretentious egotistical garbage.

>>1465569
The problem with philosophy in general which keeps it from being useful in a practical sense is that by definition it exists only in the areas which science can't yet touch. So it will always be a bit 'pretentious' since it will never be practical -- except for maybe ethics.

>>1465672
>by definition it exists only in the areas which science can't yet touch
What the fuck? Whoever told you that this is the "definition" was lying to you

>>1465672
Haha OK bud you have no idea what you're talking about

>>1462802
But it doesn't really. Religious posters here would be mostly level 0, and telling them that knowledge is impossible usually triggers the fuck out of them.

>>1465458
Probably in opposition to Nietzschean or Kierkegaardian existentialism.

While I'm pleased to see I rank "highly" on this scale (hey I'm only human), I think ranking enlightenment on a scale seems... not very fucking enlightened at all. It's kind of hilarious to say that knowledge is impossible, and then make an absolute declaration about someone else's level of enlightenment.

>>1465599
>n-no one's better than anyone!! w-we're all the same!!

stop embarrassing yourself you shut-in manchild

>>1465727
So what, Sartre and Camus? You could just say "existentialism." Nietzsche and Kierkegaard aren't even existentialists.

>>1462564
>As all knowledge is inherently founded on faith...

Fuck that.

And where the fuck is the level for people who understand religion to be a horrible, massive lie which robs people of precious time they have in their only life and which should be ended by any means necessary?

>>1465883
Level 2 - rooted plebeian

Fucking Lel, you think empiricism can prove its own validity

>>1465765
Hey I didn't write the list, but both are considered existentialists.

>>1465902
Where the fuck did I give you the impression that social constructs are irrational and all that other garbage?

And fuck you, boiling down trust in empiricism to "hurr all knowledge is faith" is retarded.

what tier is "nothing makes any sense and i don't know what the hell is going on at all"

>>1465765
>Nietzsche and Kierkegaard aren't even existentialists.
Are you fucking retarded?

>>1466057
Literally explain to me right now how Nietzsche and Kierkegaard are existentialists. And I don't wanna hear "duh everybody says they are" because that's bullshit. Explain with reasons.

>>1466041
-2

>>1466064
Kierkegaard literally coined the Absurd you utter pleb

>>1466064
How about you explain why they aren't, considering you spoke before I did and your opinion is the one that goes against every academic viewpoint on the subject.

>>1466073
>>1466074
Settle down ladies. If you actually studied philosophy you'd know that just because they influenced the later existentialists doesn't make them existentialists themselves. And most professional philosophers would agree with me that both of their positions are much more nuanced and, in fact, almost directly contradict the later post-modern existentialist project. Kierkegaard for instance is literally a Christian who believes in the Creation. Nietzsche believes in the Overman. Both of these things (amongst others) create an ethically 'up-building' framework that gives a definite teleology to human ethics and actions. This is directly counter to later existentialism. Sartre took a few vague assumptions from Kierkegaard and his poetry-writing friends and then just ended up becoming a fucking Marxist. You can argue with my interpretation if you want but I don't really care.

>>1466064
Because their philosophies are both about funding existential meaning in a universe without apparent meaning, coping with the anxiety and ambiguity inherent to existence. You know, the shit existentialists were all about.

>>1465967
Empiricism is nice, but you're still taking the fact your senses can be considered reliable on faith.

>>1466100
>Sartre took a few vague assumptions from Kierkegaard and his poetry-writing friends and then just ended up becoming a fucking Marxist.

Yeah, you're not biased at all.

>>1462602
>Level 2 spotted
ad hominem

>>1462788
>he who does not have ears to hear
ad hominem

>>1464900
>level 2 detected
ad hominem

>>1465569
>Literally a pleb marker
ad hominem

>>1465714
>Haha OK bud you have no idea what you're talking about
ad hominem

>>1465741
>stop embarrassing yourself you shut-in manchild
ad hominem

>>1466117
>Empiricism is nice, but you're still taking the fact your senses can be considered reliable on faith.
actual argument

please note the difference people.

>>1466120
Nobody is free of bias. Hell when I was 16 I was a marxist too. But to go through the whole fucking rigamarole of "human being is inherently non-teleological and we are thrown into our freedom and have to create from scratch a meaningful ethic and it's terrible" and then to just become a Marxist is like... you could have skipped right to the end! It's ridiculous. That 60s shit just collapses into itself, a huge metaphysical question mark just to end up protesting with college kids.

iit: my edgy world view is better than yours.

>>1466132
Marxism fit perfectly into his ideology, since he viewed money as the primary reason people would live in bad faith rather than owning up to their choices. He later wound up becoming an anarchist due to disagreeing with the authoritarian bent of most Marxist organizations.

>>1462564
not bad imo, but i think believing that total ego-loss or separation from self-hood can be achieved probably puts you at level 0

then again i may just be a reaaally unenlightened 6

>>1462564
i'm level 4 i guess

>>1466147
>he viewed money as the primary reason people would live in bad faith rather than owning up to their choices.
Isn't this just "false consciousness?" Why do we even need Sartre then?

>>1466174
No, the idea was in his concept of living in bad faith. Basically, everything we do is out of choice. The things we convince ourselves that we "have to" do, we really don't. You don't "have to" work that job you hate, you just want it more than you want to live on the street. Once you come to the realization that it's a choice to live that way, you can start actively pursuing alternatives. So he viewed money as the primary reason people choose to lie to themselves and avoid living with authenticity.

>>1466122
>this post
ad hominem

>>1466183
That still sounds exactly the same to me. Because of false consciousness, the workers choose not to pursue their self-interest, choose not to seize the means of production, but instead just support the status quo. And then the radical vanguard can help them "come to the realization that it's a choice" and help them "start actively pursuing alternatives."

Who else /failed ascetic/ here?

stop trying to force this meme on /his/

Right now im kneeling at the counter-top, eating from a tub of kirkland super extra-large peanuts: roasted & salted, virginia vareity, extra crunchy, glutten free!

what level am i at?

>>1467170
0

>>1467176
UPDATE!
i've put away the peanuts and am now eating "almonds, US#1, Supreme Whole"

what about now?

>ywn be considered a buddha

:(

>>1467200
>tfw level 6 with the ultra-rare momentary glimpse of level infinity

this... this is a good feel

>>1462564
I find myself groping towards 5, but frequently sliding back down into 4.

>>1462769
even the scientist had to have faith that his experiment would yield meaningful results. Reason is faith plus empirical observation.

What's so hard to understand about that?

>>1462564
Level 2 is correct and people who say otherwise are deluded.

>>1462564
>no longer am limited by material concepts such as self-hood
>come with me
>me
lmao

>>1466211
Then it's because you're an idiot. The concept of "bad faith" was entirely individualistic and apolitical. It didn't just apply to money and politics, it applied to all matters of life.

>>1462691
I wouldn't take it as a compliment, level 6 is on the same level as enlightenment as "I don't care". It's stating the obvious and saying it's your choice I don't really mind on the end of it.

Any chart that ranks this sort of shit is objectively retarded.

>>1467233
So you're a narcissistic agnostic then, cool. Or do you honestly think that at points you understand the nature of God?

>>1462564
Rorschach from watchmen would have been lvl 5 right?

File: EHEHEHEHE.jpg (97KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 300x300px

>>1462564
>Essential truth/level infinity paragraph places ego-loss as the primary or one of the primary purposes behind enlightenment.
>Paragraph begins with "I"

>>1462564
Level 5 is a spook, you can't "create meaning"

>>1468932
>You can't create meaning.
Why not?

fun fact: if you flew out of the universe in a ship you would be flying out of my nostril but you'd be microscopic
thoughts?

File: liubeivisitszhugeliang.jpg (256KB, 1600x773px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 1600x773px

level "-1"

File: tophat.jpg (94KB, 486x750px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 486x750px

level 2+

File: Shiva.jpg (757KB, 1816x2439px) Image search: [Google]

757KB, 1816x2439px

>>1468962
If you were Shiva, that would probably be the easiest way out.

>>1468819
>holy
>roman
>empire
>higher than shit tier