What are the manliest philosophical concepts? The categorical

Epictetus' sphere of choice

Will to power

Wu wei

Zen koans

Enlightenment

>>332536
having your own philosophy, duh.

Cynicism
Stoicism

Stirner, he'll help you get past boyish shit like looking for a manly philosophy

>>332536
Categorical imperative is the biggest pussy shit ever. Ever seen those movies where the hero needs to do something illegal in order to save the day and the bureaucrat wants to stop the hero in the name "upholding the law" or "sorry it's my duty" or "if I let you do that than everyone would". The hatable bureaucrat is the guy following the categorical imperative.

If John Matrix listened to Kant he wouldn't steal a car, break into a gun shop, arm himself, and illegally murder hired henchmen to save his daughter and assassinate a terrorist. He wouldn't even be allowed to trespass onto a military base!

Just War

Deep Ecology

Black Nationalism

Virtue Ethics

Consequentialism

Master morality

File: happycrook.jpg (33KB, 419x419px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 419x419px

>>332725
You don't actually believe this, do you?
What leads you to this conclusion?

>>332536
So what do you mean by "manly"? I think you have to define that before you really ask this question.

I for one don't think "manliness" is a good quality to judge philosophical concepts by. It depends on the physical characteristics of human beings and differences in the average behaviors of the sexes, which are at least heavily influenced by culture, instead of something more abstract and applicable to any thinking being, including humans with really divergent minds.

>>332536
empiricism

Islam.

A close runner up is Stoicism.

File: nCRc3fV.jpg (151KB, 1013x1352px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1013x1352px

>Crom dwells on a great mountain. What use to call on him? Little he cares if men live or die. Better to be silent than to call his attention to you; he will send you dooms, not fortune! He is grim and loveless, but at birth he breathes power to strive and slay into a man's soul. What else shall men ask of the gods?

>>332742
It's true, under deontology stealing is always wrong, even if it is to save your daughter from terrorists. And lying is always wrong, even if it is to protect the Jews hiding in your basement from Nazis

>>332833
Mah nigga

>>332850
>Philosophy for Gods
It's like giving a shot of insulin to a perfectly healthy person.

>>332858
Neither of those are true. First, it depends on whether they think stealing and lying is wrong to begin with, and secondly, it depends on how complex the rule is. If the rule is stealing is wrong if it harms the person being stolen from, or lying is wrong if the person deserves to know the truth, then both of those examples can be safely ignored.

Not the first guy, btw.

>>333587
Yeah, the categorical imperative isn't "the perfect morality" it's a guide on how to build the perfect morality.

>>332536
The meaning of life is to chop wood and carry water

>>333587
According to categorical imperative you CAN steal but than you could never ever complain when someone else steals from you. Alternative you can come up with some incredibly specif universal rule.

John Matrix did the following
-Stole a sports car and broke traffic laws to chase the man that kidnapped his daughter
-Break into private property
-Stole several guns from the gun shop
-Lied to a terrorist
-Shot about 50 terrorists

You can't justifify any of this with Kant. In fact Kant says speficially says you can never lie

>>333673
You can't just discount the circumstances under which he did those thing. That's like saying "you should never try to inhale underwater" is the same as "you should never try to inhale".

>>333711
Dentology is the philosophy that least cares about circumstance! That's the point of having unviersial rules, they are universal so they work in all places. Furthermore lying is something Kant specifically says is incompatible with his philosophy. Lying allows you to use people as a means to an end which is another thing Kant specifically said should never be done.

A philosophy that cares about circumstance would be something closer to constitutionalism, the opposite of Kant.

>>333673
>Stole a sports car and broke traffic laws to chase the man that kidnapped his daughter
A sports car that was most likely ensured and probably didn't harm the owner with it being stolen; additionally, one could say that property laws because irrelevant in extreme circumstances like this. Traffic laws are only applicable when it's everyday business, not when it's life or death.
>Break into private property
Not necessarily any harm done and property laws might be irrelevant at this point.
>Stole several guns from the gun shop
Same as before.
>Lied to a terrorist
He didn't deserve to know the truth, therefor lying is no different than saying nothing at all.
>Shot about 50 terrorists
Self-defense.

Also, I'm not going off of Kant, I'm arguing for deontology. One could argue that a societal rule for the mutual benefit of all is not that same as a moral rule that is universal and cannot be broken. Property laws could be considered a societal rule that can be discarded when it comes in the way of a moral law.
>>333739
There can be different moral systems that contradict each other and they can both be deontological. Kant's morals might be in conflict with someone else's even though they are both Deontologists.

File: L'Image_et_le_Pouvoir_-_Buste_cuirassé_de_Marc_Aurèle_agé_-_3.jpg (2MB, 1509x2263px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1509x2263px

"Take away thy opinion, and then there is taken away the complaint, "I have been harmed." Take away the complaint, "I have been harmed," and the harm is taken away."

"That which does not make a man worse than he was, also does not make his life worse, nor does it harm him either from without or from within."

"In he morning when thou risest unwillingly, let this thought be present- I am rising to the work of a human being. Why then am I dissatisfied if I am going to do the things for which I exist and for which I was brought into the world? Or have I been made for this, to lie in the bed-clothes and keep myself warm?- But this is more pleasant.- Dost thou exist then to take thy pleasure, and not at all for action or exertion? Dost thou not see the little plants, the little birds, the ants, the spiders, the bees working together to put in order their several parts of the universe? And art thou unwilling to do the work of a human being, and dost thou not make haste to do that which is according to thy nature?"