13

One accepts the absurd because it is banal, like the weather: arbitrary but every-day. Take your title question. Why should you drink a cup of coffee, rather than killing yourself? Because, perhaps, you enjoy drinking coffee. But why should that matter? Well, it's a priority — and interestingly, because coffee is an acquired taste, it is a priority ...


13

Introductory remarks This is subject to debate and there is no definite answer. The general consensus is that no definite set of properties can possibly be given and if it is done, these sets are relative to the end they serve and the historical as well as the cultural context, i.e. we live in a "post-essentialist world" (Ramsey 2013) when it comes ...


11

Humans and other animals need to recognize favorable conditions and partners distinct from immediate prospects for obtaining a reward. It is likely that a sense of beauty is what accomplishes this. Although there are many cases of nonfunctional beauty, as long as they don't distract us too heavily, we will end up with partners who are less likely to be ...


7

It's specifically a concept from the French existentialist work of Sartre and de Beauvoir, and refers to the unwillingess of people to take responsibility for their choices and the self they create through their actions. It's difficult and frightening to admit we make our own choices, so we invent reasons to justify ourselves. In Sartrean ethics you have ...


4

The idea that it exists to strengthen the patriarchy is silly; the concept of fatherhood directly benefits the female vastly more than the male. According to evolution, it likely came about as a consequence of human's extended childhood. Because of the immense amount of resources that a human child requires, and the fact that a human woman is very limited ...


4

Even if we accept your basic assumption --that responsible fatherhood in human beings dates back only as far as the dawn of human societies --that doesn't imply it can't be part of an evolutionary process. Suppose that human societies have been around 10,000 years, and that being a good father provides a strong advantage to your children. That's plenty of ...


4

The answer is simpler than you think. "Fashion" is the effect, not the cause. Combine two separate concepts: First, that pleasure resulting from a certain aesthetic fades over time. So yes to your first question, it is the aesthetic value that changes. You can only eat ice cream so long until you get tired of eating it, even though nothing changed about ...


4

That's a false trichotomy. One can also (4) Recognize a non-universal source for meaning (5) Disagree that we are sure things are meaningless (6) Ignore philosophical arguments that assume that disharmony between what we want and believe is so desperately important that we should kill ourselves or leap into the arms of hypothetical superbeings to save us....


4

The original German reads: "Du solltest Gewalt über dein Für und Wider bekommen". The capitalization in German is required, so in English it is an interpretation of the translator. 'das Für und Wider abwägen' is German idiom for weighing the pros and cons. Basically the text says: you should master your pros and cons; meaning, you should not stick to just ...


4

The traditional role of a taboo is prohibition of an action, not of discussion, but the two are often mixed when the term is used loosely, see e.g. Gao's study of English "taboo" words. Taboos against homicide or incest had obvious biological/social benefits. Volume 3 of a classical comparative study of mythology and religion, Frazer's Golden Bough,...


3

This answer isn't actually mine, it's from an article on NewPhilosopher. I will paraphrase the article but all credit should go to the author of said article. We should start by recognising the obvious, that the claim is addressed to those who satisfy the quality of "being human". For Socrates, a human being should have the ability to eclipse basic desire ...


3

Does not existentialism fit the third criteria? To "Accept the Absurd" is to accept the notion that humanity is incapable of determining whether or not there is greater meaning to life. Another prime example of this notion is apatheism - the idea that we are incapable of determining whether or not a higher power exists, and therefore that the pursuit of ...


3

I'm not particularly convinced by Dawkins analogy, interesting though it is at first sight; it's a variant of Darwinism as a philosophy - as opposed to biology - applied to both culture and epistemology. One might call it a revival of social Darwinism, like Spencerism, on the cultural plane, interpreting culture broadly to include science, the arts and ...


3

You have noticed something very important I think. The logos ("word" will do, but it is an inadequate translation) is a sign, but is it really a mere sign, or does it actually participate, actively and ontologically with/in the godhead? If it participates the words of prayer have a real power flowing back and forth from this God. There is a saying in ...


3

Introduction The short answer is that the "Word of God" shouldn't be read as prayer. Within Biblical hermeneutics, there are two ways to interpret Biblical texts - either exegetically or eisegetically. That is - either one can read meaning out of the text and context into which it was delivered, or they can place their own ideas into the text, bending it ...


3

I think there are two main elements or aspects to Ortega's 'The Dehumanisation of Art' (La deshumanización del arte e Ideas sobre la novela, 1925; Princeton tr., 1968). The first can be illustrated by a passage from the book : A great man is dying. His wife is by his bedside. A doctor takes the dying man's pulse. In the background two more persons are ...


3

The answer is "yes." All forms are best at conveying emotion =) The idea of excluding multi-media mediums, however, points to a very strange distinction that one must draw. One must identify the senses which are being used to convey the piece, and ensure only one sense is used at a time. That depends on where we draw the lines between the senses, so on ...


3

Maria Kronfeldner rejects the possibility of an essentialist definition of human nature because biological evolution is a complex, dynamic and fluid process which produces populations rather than individuals, stable only in a specific time and place: given Darwinian ontology, there are no necessary and sufficient conditions for membership in a ...


2

I do this by creating a false meaning structure based on Russell and Harris, which goes like so: Live a life inspired by love and guided by knowledge Work to increase the happiness and reduce the suffering of conscious creatures The fact that there is no ULTIMATE meaning doesn't matter on this view. We are human, and we can experience love, happiness, ...


2

Can you support your contention that a perception of beauty is unnecessary for survival? The beauty of a thing often is intimately related to its intrinsic characteristics. The fact that we cannot draw a direct line between between an object's attractiveness and its objective desirability in all cases does not mean that the ability to perceive beauty is not ...


2

I strongly recommend to read this short article by Asimov about the nature of scientific understanding. Hopefully that would resolve the questions about the final understanding of nature.


2

Anthropologist David Graeber did his doctoral work on Madagascar, the 2nd to last large landmass to become permanently inhabited by humans, and gave this great talk about what we can learn about the 'state of nature' from it. He contends that highly unequal societies, eg those with slaves, are unstable & when they dissolve cultural tactics emerge to ...


2

The unstated major premise implicit in this line of reasoning is that some kind of 'potential' must precede anything that comes into existence. This is a tautological and not very useful way of conceiving of potential. Might as well claim the potential for writing and language were present in the Big Bang. Potential is normally taken to denote something ...


2

We could or could not have skills that we haven't discovered yet. How can we be sure? We haven't discovered them yet! We can't say yes or no, because we just ignore that right now. Also: "We didn't always have language". We have always had language, what we have not always had is written language, that is the signs system we use for writing and reading. ...


2

Brains are powerful information computation engines. Although they are specialized for certain tasks (vision, language, etc.), they also are flexible enough to take over the roles of other parts of the brain. Given such flexibility, there is almost certainly some new capacity that we will want to use them for, and will do so successfully and well. It won'...


2

For starters, I would look at the idea of historical recurrance. As the wikipedia article notes Nevertheless, while it is often remarked that "History repeats itself," in cycles of less than cosmological duration this cannot be strictly true. While not strictly true, there are several examples of philosophers and historians who have made an argument ...


2

While mathematically, it might make sense to treat everyone's situation as unique solely because everyone occupies a different point in situation-space, it is possible for two things to be so similar they might as well be the same. The postmodern argument of "the death of the subject" asserts that most of the new, trendy, avant-garde styles of writing like ...


2

You're making a category error: you are defining "your experiences" as something disjoint from the physical processes that generate your consciousness. But, of course, if the physicalist view is correct, there is (and can be) no distinction. You don't ask "by what mechanism does my camera record a picture of what it is pointing at, instead of what some ...


2

If we're to use other animals as an example of what comes natural for humans, there's no way to generalize fatherhood across different species. Among animals, there are many fatherhood strategies, with some males not caring at all about their offspring, while others (like the alligator pipefish or the marsupial frog) going as far as carrying the offspring ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible