<@&682288520680964151>

thanks

Yes, Diogenes should be taken seriously, no matter how much of a controversial figure he was. All philosophers must be taken seriously, and all views of people on the world should be taken into consideration.

The thing with Diogenes actually, is how against nature and the Athenian society he was. After being banished from Sinope, he settled in Athens, and without being an educated man, yet a very intelligent one, he criticized the Athenian society, calling it corrupt and confused. The thing is, he was often thought to be a madman. He was often seen carrying a lamp in the daylight and so on, but all these "stupid" things that he did, they had a symbolic meaning. The lamp in the daylight clearly meant how we need to be bright (mentally) both in the day and in the night - both when it's dangerous and when it's not dangerous.

What's also very interesting about him is how he was against nature, and was the definition of muh (((degeneracy))), sleeping with women, drinking, and spending his incredibly few money to whores.

He also mocked Alexander the Great right in front of him in Corinth I believe, after being captured by pirates and turned to a slave; his slavers brought him to Corinth for an auction.

However, despite what many would describe as "madness," Diogenes was actually very intelligent, a degenerate indeed, if you want, but he was quite the figure.

i like diogenes

he was one with nature but in a different way, a more primal way

"All philosophers must be taken seriously".
- Diogenes left the chat
- Diogenes came back, with a rubber chicken, a sinister grin and is heading to @Koninos

Diogenes was the original shitposter

@ComradeChaos sometimes literally. Or, at least he took the piss outta some arguments.

Really, there needs to be a follow-up to the Bruces' Philosophers Song which features Diogenes, and Kierkegaard. Yeah, that'd be great. <:smug:591181720565579807>

He was just too intelligent for us.

Too intelligent for humanity.

Diogenes: My goals are beyond your understanding

Funny.

If reincarnation exists, Diogenes, knowingly keeps coming back as a crazed cat lady.

or a shitposter on 4chan

Why not both? You saying crazed cat ladies can't have internet access? That's racist. 😆

Let's keep this serious boys.

🙄 yes boss.

@Ater Votum there's a combination of things I think I could relate to therein, but the biggest one is the Apology. I was actually reading that book a few years ago and was struck by the parallels in my own life at the time... But I digress because that topic would be more about religion than philosophy.

Philosophy is linked to Religion.

So you can say it.

Fair enough. I had just prior to thumbing through Apology, read through The Psychedelic Experience. Itself tho being loosely based off the Tibetan Book of the Dead, I found parallels to teachings found within LDS doctrines.
I decided express such finding within the LDS Young Single Adults Facebook page I was apart of. Though, my language was not, is not, so refined and mild mannered. I had, somewhere in my dissertation, used the word, "bullshit". open_mouth some mamby pamby Peter fucken Priesthood dickwad, whom could not recall meeting IRL, likely a newly wed husband of one the young ladies I did know, tries to take me to task over such a blithesome term as "bullshit". Heaven forbid! rolling_eyes worse yet, this bitch was trying to chide me on "proper language", whilst spelling my name wrong! Honestly, that's a trigger point for me, getting my actual name wrong, especially if it's plainly given, clear as day.
So I'm trying to maintain my cool, but I'm blatantly laughing at the situation of someone trying to laud over me and my use of words when they themselves can't even see the error in their ways. But of course, being the prolific and provocative pariah I be, seemingly all hell broke lose and people were coming out of the woodworks just to condemn me for one word...

... The irony is, I had tried many times before, months, years, to get conversations going in that group to no avail. Sprinkle in a little bit of controversy and everyone was talking jive! Now, during the days this was happening, not only was I defending my post, citing (and linking to both the online PDF and the YouTube interview) On Bullshit by Harry Frankfurt and trying to calmly tell these holier than thou art folk to check my references as I've checked theirs, I was of course taking time to read said Apology of Socrates (as well as trying to keep myself busy with any odds and ends of menial and pseudo important tasks on the property I was residing on).
So as I was reading the old Greek's statements and rebuttals against his accusers, it felt so relatable to what I had been dealing with online, albeit to a less fatal degree. I made reference to such deep seeded concept, in the group itself. Soon after tho, I was booted and banned from the group.

Moral of the story, moral busybodies, goody-2-shoes, suck ass.

<@&682288520680964151> Daily Topic 📚

- Are humans inherently good, evil, or somewhere in between? Is good and evil even objective enough to use as a scale?

Humans are inherently self-interested which will display itself as either good or evil depending on the context. But, the fact that the 'goodness' is context-dependent, humans are then 'depraved'...capable of both great good and great evil....but inherently evil stemming from the self-interest

It's a weird question

Because now humans are born with bad

But this was not always the case

Adam And Eve were born with a truley nuetral way

But since the original sin it is inheritly evil

Aside from that

What is better?

To be born good

Or to overcome your evil through great effort?

I guess the idea would be that if you were 'born good', you are someone that continuously overcomes evil

From the start, so I would say that is better. Now, if you are saying 'good' as in harmless, I'd say that is worthless. Good is not harmless

@Yotta To be born good would imply you are not tempted to do bad, nor ever have bad thoughts