Does philosophy has any value insofar as it doesn't involve

>implying there is economic misdistribution

>>79841
Have you ever sat down and tried epistemology?

>>79856
That would imply that I have a a house, a table, electricity, warmth and food to sustain my bodily functions while I read le Philosophy.

>>79841
Humanity is not a robotic species, we just don't work to survive and not simultaneously philosophise. The two exists in conjunction. Historically speaking, only the balance has changed - i.e in caveman times more pressure was on survival, so philosophy was reduced to screaming around a fire and drawing the occasional thing on a wall. Nowadays, pressures for survival are minimal and therefore philosophy is blossoming - this means that its a great time to be alive because we're living in the age in which we're tackling the most existential and humanist themes.

Nihilism, Absurdism, Existentialism - most of these schools of thought did not reach their maturity until early 19th/20th century. And they have been confronting, so much so that suicide has become rampant, suggesting that philosophy may have an even bigger role to play in certain circumstances than wealth, economics, survival - since people are choosing their negative outlook over circumstantial prosperity.

>>>/lit/

My brother majored in philosophy and swears it helped him in his career, especially his logic classes. He's doing fairly well but is not doing anything related to philosophy.

>>80350
My point is that it is very seriously a part of who we are, and should be considered with that sense of importance. Secondly, its value is that it inspires us to work, to kill, to create different kinds of worlds.

Philosophy created Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Imperialist Japan, Neo-America and so forth - whether right or wrong, philosophy is influential, and so must be considered to have power, which may or may not be a function of value.

>>80377
This is the board for philosophy, dipshit.

>>80429
>Neo-America
What the heck is this supposed to mean?

>>80489
>>>/lit/

>>80398
I'm pretty sure theology has also helped many intelleginet people cultivate their way of thinking. Blatant uninformed faith in religion offers peace of mind. Selling lots of popular science books is good for the writer and the author. I was talking I'm absolute terms: For any philosophical endeavour to be useful does it have to involve itself in the betterment of the human condition and can it be done without delving into economics?

>>80534
>/his/ - history and humanities
>/his/
>history
>and
>humanities

>>80524
Must be a GiTS fan.

>>80629
>>>/lit/

>>80350
Absurdum and existentialism are bullshit terms that refer specifically to Camus' (the only absurdist) and Sartre's (the only self-professed existentialist) misinterpretations of Nietzsche and Heidegger.
>>80625
What is "the human condition" and how can you tell if it is made better or worse by something? Plato would argue that answering this is necessary if you want to better the human condition and the process of asking and answering such a question is philosophy, therefore philosophy is not just "useful" but necessary if you have such an end.

>hurr durr children in africa
Nobody cares

>>81202
>Sartre
>self-proclaimed existentialist
I'm gonna need some source. I thought he didn't like the term.
>>81202
The human condition in this sense is that humans unlike wild animals aren't born with what they need to survive in nature. For this they need the support of a societal group and it's most advanced techniques. The better this group gets at this job, the better the human condition.

>>81317
How are humans different from wolves, lions, apes, bees and ants in the respect that they need a group to survive? And what is "this job"? Continued survival of the species? Growth of the species? Survival/growth of the society? Prolonged survival of individuals within the species/society (mean lifespan? median?)? More comfort for individuals in the species/society (if so how is this measured?)?

Sartre defends his existentialism in "Existentialism is a Humanism" (1946). No other writer accused of being such accepted the term until it was irrelevant.

Yes, I would, because there are other problems.

>>79841
>he equates improving the human condition with "tackling the problem of economic misdistribution"

Look here, faggot. You've made the classic mistake of equating academic philosophy with all philosophy. Classical Western Philosophy has more in common with Eastern thought than any of your cute fucking "thinkers", who have more in common with my retarded sociology-major exgf than with any serious philosopher.

If you can't PRACTICE a philosophy, the philosophy is no good. And guess what, you can't practice sociology. Go study that stuff, or modern philosophy. I had a philosophy professor once who admitted she would straight up be better placed in sociology "or something like that".

Philosophy — TRUE philosophy, rather than this naval-gazing social commentary bullshit you're enamored with — is about how to fucking live your life. It prescribes modes of living, not blueprints for fanciful economies or governments. Try looking into Stoicism for a great example of a philosophy that is eminently concerned with the betterment of the human condition, and still doesn't give a rats ass about "economic misdistribution" — you mean "maldistribution", btw.

File: laughingwhoresonecstasy.jpg (11KB, 238x212px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 238x212px

>>80350
>Nihilism, Absurdism, Existentialism - most of these schools of thought did not reach their maturity until early 19th/20th century.
one could make some great arguments to the effect that those philosophies have not reached anything that could be called "maturity". Pic related.

>>80082
No, it fucking wouldn't, you ignorant slut. Epictetus was a slave. Diogenes was even worse off. You're posting on fucking 4chan, if you have the time to do that, you have the time to read "le Philosophy", you faggot. You don't even need to READ "le Anything". In the words of Marcus Aurelius (the one true Emperor desu),
>Stop asking yourself what it means to be a good man, and be one.

The philosophy you are thinking of is concerned with big and fancy ideas, the kind that created the societies >>80429 mentioned. The philosophy you COULD be thinking of has far greater rewards than mere creature comforts.