What do you think is the worst philosophical viewpoint?

[iRevanchist]

the philosophy behind anarchism as a political movement is pants on head retarded.

Agreed. i dont understand how anyone could possibly think it *could* be a good idea.

 

[9thRequiem]

And the worst philosophical idea?

Two words, Koran and the Bible (Yes, I said it)

The reason for this is because of these say they that it is THE word of God and most people tend to believe that and follow its ideas. I disagree with this, simply because they both were written by a human being. Humans make errors, argue and lie. Not only that, the bible itself was translated so many times, some of it might have got lost/destroyed in the translation. Koran has been interpretted so many times, and look at all these 'Extremists' and what they are doing, all in the name of God, in the name of a book. Crusades were fought, and they still are, in the name of an old book.

I am a positive Agnostic, which means I believe that there is likely to be a 'higher force' out there, but I don't know what it looks like or what it is like. I am probably never to know either.

I think people should just make their own minds on the subject of what they believe in, rather than base their way of thinking on an outdated book.

Agreed. The main reason I've got to agree is that there can be no discussion or argument. You can pick apart the finer logical points of any other philosophical viewpoints, as they are based on clear assumptions with a framework built atop them. Book-based religious viewpoints considered as philosophies take the assumptions that "God exists" and "He totally wants you to do exactly this" and leaves it there.

Small point : positive agnosticism isn't about which "side" you fall (Exists vs Not Exists), but posits that as we're not god, the entire discussion is invalid due to it being beyond the scope we could ever understand. (You're probably aware of this, just making sure everyone reading it is on the same page).

Edit : Cthulu? I don't think he exists, since he was a fictional character, made by a human (Lovecraft). Optimus prime was also a fictional character. What is this? Why are we using fictional characters that exist for our entertainment rather than talk of more serious personas like Plato, Kant and Hobbes?

I think this was introduced to illustrate the far-reaches of the argument from lack of proof. Optimus Prime could exist, in space or in disguise, with conveniently similar fiction a pure co-incidence. We have no proof he doesn't. Pretty much the moon-teapot/spaghetti-monster, only he's a robot that can turn into a truck.

 

[Ruwrak]

The worst philosophical viewpoint?

To say that there is such a thing as a bad or worst philosophical viewpoint. . .

 

[DaWaffledude]

Whatever the idiots who think that the Sith are better are preaching.

 

[Racecar1994]

Sartre's ideas on Free will and Determinism have always rubbed me up the wrong way, mainly for the same reasons as Cartesian Dualism. However, it's never bothered me in the same way as Plantinga's idea has...

"It is entirely right, rational and reasonable to believe in God without any evidence or argument at all"
- Plantinga

Regardless of my beliefs about God's existence, I just can't see the sense in this argument, especially when Plantinga eventually had to argue his point anyway : S.

 

[Togs]

Nihilism, satanism, objectivism; basically any -ism that says "fuck everybody else".
We are a species of pack animals and do not live in isolation, in my mind compassion and altruism are godly virtues.

 

[xochiquetzal]

I don't think theres one truly bad philosophical viewpoint.
there all created in different societies during different times for different reasons.

and all philosophies ends up contradicting them self when put in motion and integrated in society. mainly because the human spirit does not allow it to function the way it's creator intended.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

I'm sorry if I come across as stupid, but I'm sort of confused as to how your question applies to what you quoted.

Philosophies that deal with Human understanding, feelings or "place in the world" conveniently ignore the potential for their to be no meaning in the world. They're humanocentric, which is an illogical position to take when we may not be the peak of evolution yet.

If we are only brains in a jar, or shadows on a wall, all of our preening work on Science, Faith and the role of human existence is essentially worthless. If that is true, then do we have anything of value? That's Nihilism.

 

[Jedamethis]

Which ones think that there's no point? That one.

But why should we assume there is a point to anything? Unless you're religious, there really is no logical reason to.

OT: I don't think there's any inherently bad viewpoint, but I'd say that inconsistency and contradiction are the quickest ways to invalidating them.

Well if there's no point to living, why not just die? Not a very useful outlook on life.

 

[GLo Jones]

Which ones think that there's no point? That one.

But why should we assume there is a point to anything? Unless you're religious, there really is no logical reason to.

OT: I don't think there's any inherently bad viewpoint, but I'd say that inconsistency and contradiction are the quickest ways to invalidating them.

Well if there's no point to living, why not just die? Not a very useful outlook on life.

I keep living for the same reasons I do anything. Because I'm a slave to my own instincts and cravings.

For example, I clean my teeth because my human mind recognises that if I don't, I will likely ultimately suffer for it, and one of our basic motivations is to avoid suffering.

You ask 'why not just die', well the very core of our instincts is guided by survival. I am terrified of death, and would much rather put effort into my own survival. That doesn't mean I don't acknowledge the pointlessness of it.

 

[poleboy]

If I considered Rand a philosopher, I would say objectivism. Since I don't, I'll just add that it's silly to start rating philosophy like that, it defeats the point. Philosophy is a way to approach life. It is the study of everything and nothing. Each discipline has been examined from many angles by many people in different times, and some have survived until today. But they are all equally flawed, because none of them truly tell us what we want to know. So in a sense, they are all the worst.

 

[zfactor]

Which ones think that there's no point? That one.

Existentialism.

Anyway, any belief that is not tolerant of other's beliefs. I am rather tolerant, so I only do not like it when people force beliefs on others, I don't try to stop them (since that would be forcing my beliefs on them...).

 

[FalloutJack]

Any and all metaphysics. Who gives a fuck if god exists? All that matters is we do.

Actually, I'm gonna say metaphysics for an even deeper reason than that. Numerous practices in the field - and I tooks a course in this, so I know of what I speak - seem to be the act of taking a particular line of thinking as to how things work in the world - such as the actual function of mind versus body, whether actions are independent or not, and so on - and if logical arguments were raised against it, they'd just handwave with some drivel about "Oh, well my argument does not perceive that in such a way that it is relevent in any fashion." or something similar. In short, metaphysics is an open passport to make up shit on the spot and not accept any argument to the contrary because it doesn't fit within the reference of their newfound perception. What a load of shit!

 

[Viking Incognito]

Not exactly on topic but anyway: Putting aside questions of morality for now, doesn't Machiavellian leadership sound objectively effective? Not good, or right, but effective in terms of securely functioning government. and yet, everyone always shits all over it or uses it as an insult.

 

[Brandon237]

Which ones think that there's no point? That one.

I think Nihilism. And agreed, that is just bloody stupid. And it is annoying to hear "But what's the point?" So annoying. Also any philosophy that involves have people not think and be blindly controlled as if they are not people... *cough**cough* Stalinism.

3 captchas in 1 day... not funny Escapist.

 

[Ruzzian Roulette]

Also agnosticism in practically all its forms.

Why because i have had no proof on either side fully supporting true belief.So people do not make up an answer well i can see how blindly following a belief is so better

Have agnostics decided whether cthulhu exists yet? What about JC Denton or Optimus Prime? Concluding that there is no evidence to support the existence of these entities is obviously, as you have put it, blind belief. Those silly atheists with their Reasonable Doubt and falsifiable beliefs.

Have agnostics decided whether food keeps them alive yet? What about water? or air? They've yet to die for lack of them so I suppose they're just blindly eating, drinking and breathing in the meantime. Those silly theists, how dare they choose to keep a viable objective truth in mind?

I know you're basically trolling at this point, but I think you're missing the point of agnosticism. A person can be an Atheist and still be an agnostic. Likewise, they can be Christian, Buddhist, etc.

What defines an agnostic is the unwillingness to declare something is "Truth" without supporting evidence. They can have strong beliefs in the existence or non-existence of God, but they're willing to acknowledge there is no conclusive proof one way or another. This doesn't change their views, but it does enable them to more easily sympathize and accept views they don't agree with.

A good example I like to use is sub-atomic particles. Prior to their discovery, a person could reasonably say "Sub-atomic particles do not exist, since there is no evidence." These people would have been completely justified by the science of the time, but they still would have been wrong.

Agnostics just keep that in mind. They're still free to believe whatever they want. They're just more reserved when it comes to dealing out "Truths" and "Facts."

FFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

THEISM: Belief in a "God"
ATHEISM: (a-theism, or non-theism) Do not believe in a god
AGNOSTICISM: Has not made up their mind

That fucking simple

THANK YOU.

 

[Revolutionary]

I actually kinda' like some aspects of nihilism. But the philosophy behind anarchism as a political movement is pants on head retarded.

As an anarchist, I'd like to hear your reasoning.

OT: Optimism. I feel like a dick when I say it but I can't stand overly optimistic people. They settle for less when they're being ripped off in life, and they don't feel the need to change it. Half the time they don't even recognize anything is wrong, when it clearly is.

And materialism.

EDIT: It seems this thread is just full of people hating on everyone else's philosophies. Dunno if it was the greatest idea for a thread

My issue was that Anarchistic Philosophy was used as a method to try and solve problems, I don't have any problems with the actual philosophy per se,(not to say that I agree with it) but I think that trying to apply that ideology to politics is just tragically naive.

 

[TestSubject4]

I'm an auto-theistic agnostic. I believe I'm a god but I'm not sure I exist.