/abs/ - Absurdism

You are Sisyphus, this board is your boulder.


New Thread×
Name
Subject
Speak!*
Junk* Max 5 files10MB total
Tegaki
Dots
[New Thread]


ERISIAN zine


sisyphus.gif
(7.7KB, 343x372)
This board is dedicated to philosophy and the meaning of being, specifically absurdism, though any kind of philosophical discussion is allowed.

as if you were old enough to have any.jpg
(77.5KB, 600x900)
What is your philosophy of life?
Show omitted replies47 replies and 25 files redacted. View the full thread
>>1570

That's a rather nihilistic thing to say, isn't it?
Replies: >>1573
ATHF Carl - You're gonna die [so5TlXOkpHI].mp4
(936.7KB, 320x240, 00:31)
>>1571
It isn't, it just sounds that way on the surface.
4f47b1d0b45f36d19bf17d3e66b35ca21a6a8027b19d20a77bd5115d9e13f7ff.jpg
(123.2KB, 884x556)
Don't trust what is written.
I had a dream, now I have nothing

E-girl butt.jpg
(400.7KB, 1280x1707)
The singular and unrelenting reiteration of such ideas as “all there is is Being", “everything is the expression of Being” or “there is no one” are an arid and simplistic form of communication. It doesn't address or illuminate the dream seeker’s apparent dilemma and it obviously ignores the primary energetic essence of the implicit aliveness of simply Being. To continuously say that being awake or being asleep is not relevant because “Being is all there is” is like telling a blind person that it’s OK to be blind because “seeing is all there is”. This is pure idealism. Of course, there is no such thing as being asleep or being awake, but this is not seen until there is no one looking.
e46413ea361a080c697d3cbc2bd7f846c5814f5eb176bc2e14f6e6d5a326c03c.gif
(4MB, 555x555)
I'd like to say that I love the switch-o-matic's assessment of what's important in that image.
*squish-o-matic, efc muscle memory omgs
pidg-b-gone.webp
(139KB, 474x419)

1450247874128.png
(117.2KB, 206x256)
If I'm sisyphus then where the fuck's my rock nigga I'm fiending for that shit
Show omitted replies3 replies and 2 files redacted. View the full thread
135638086061.jpg
(603.8KB, 1600x1200)
Just get a job.
The use of the n-word, a racial slur directed at Black people, is a complex and deeply contentious issue that touches on themes of racism, historical trauma, and cultural sensitivity. This essay will explore the reasons why the n-word should not be used, focusing on its historical context, the harm it causes, and the importance of respectful and inclusive language.

Historical Context

The n-word has a long and painful history rooted in the transatlantic slave trade and the subsequent enslavement of Africans in the Americas. It was used to dehumanize and oppress Black people, reducing them to the status of property rather than human beings. The word was a tool of oppression, used to justify the brutal treatment and exploitation of enslaved people. Even after the abolition of slavery, the n-word continued to be used as a means of maintaining racial hierarchy and discrimination.

Psychological and Emotional Harm

The use of the n-word inflicts significant psychological and emotional harm on Black individuals. It serves as a reminder of the historical and ongoing racism that Black people have endured. The word can evoke feelings of anger, sadness, and humiliation, and it can trigger traumatic memories of racial violence and discrimination. For many Black people, hearing the n-word can be a deeply painful and distressing experience, regardless of the context in which it is used.

Cultural Appropriation and Misuse

One of the arguments often used to justify the use of the n-word is that it has been reclaimed by some members of the Black community as a term of endearment or empowerment. However, this reclamation is complex and nuanced. The word's meaning and impact can vary widely depending on who is using it and in what context. When non-Black people use the n-word, it is often seen as cultural appropriation and a disrespectful appropriation of Black culture. It can also be perceived as a form of microaggression, where the user may not intend harm but still causes offense and discomfort.

Legal and Professional Consequences
Message too long. View the full text
Replies: >>1662 >>1663
Natural Rights theory posits that certain rights are inherent to human beings and exist independently of government or societal recognition. These rights are often described as universal, inalienable, and self-evident. Prominent philosophers such as John Locke and Thomas Hobbes have contributed significantly to this discourse, asserting that individuals possess rights simply by virtue of being human.
    1. Inherent Nature of Rights: According to Natural Rights theorists, rights are not granted by governments; rather, they exist inherently within individuals. When a right is defined too narrowly—such as specifying conditions under which it can be exercised—it may lead to situations where individuals cannot fully realize their natural entitlements. For example, if freedom of speech is defined only within certain contexts (e.g., public forums), then expressions outside those contexts may be unjustly suppressed.
    2. Universal Application: The universality of Natural Rights implies that these rights should apply equally to all individuals without exception. However, when rights are codified with specific definitions or limitations, it creates a hierarchy where some individuals may find their rights recognized while others do not (e.g. marriage). This undermines the principle that all humans possess equal dignity and worth.
    3. Potential for Abuse: A strict definition of rights can lead to governmental overreach or abuse of power. If authorities define what constitutes a 
Message too long. View the full text
Replies: >>1663
>>1660
CONCLUSION:
Here's five things you need to know. If I'm Sisyphus then my rock is that I keep encountering these internet era small language model essays that abruptly end with CONCLUSION. What sort of style guide are these niggers working off of? When I read old print magazines every other article does not end with
>CONCLUSION
<CONCLUSION
>CONCLUSION
<CONCLUSION
>CONCLUSION
What did the internet mean by this?
>>1660
>>1661
I did not read these posts. AI are trained on racist liberalist garbage and therefore your wastepost echoes that same racism.

sghgyhebbshusy.jpg
(1.5MB, 3542x2656)
Hey /abs/, check out this six pack.
Show omitted replies3 replies redacted. View the full thread
>alcohol

Ew.
smile.webp
(18.3KB, 520x775)
🗿For our meeting, Grey sat demurely in a lounge of the Standard Hotel. She was outfitted conservatively, in a plaid magenta A-line dress. She looked a bit sleepy. We started our conversation by talking about books, and I asked where she first encountered Sartre. Grey grew up in Sacramento but says it wasn’t until she discovered San Francisco and its bookstores that she was exposed to literature and philosophy. “God, I sound so pretentious, but it was at City Lights,” she says. “I didn’t have enough money to buy a book, and I would just sit there and read. But, actually, the first time I read about existentialism was on the Internet.”🗿
Sasha Grey, 2011
Replies: >>1654 >>1659
>>1653
Cheers, I'll drink to that.
I have  a 5even pack
image-w856-3424593460.jpg
(79.2KB, 800x950)
Sasha_Grey_Book_Soup-3182592793.jpg
(324.6KB, 1200x1600)
>>1653
She's a book girl.

euphoric cat.gif
(1.7MB, 300x212)
What's the point of philosophy when we have science?
Show omitted replies74 replies and 18 files redacted. View the full thread
sissy.jpg
(40.7KB, 464x417)
Abstract motivation.
ClipboardImage.png
(14.6KB, 377x275)
You xomplain about philosophy like it's all that bad. They're nothing compared to language experts.
These are real definitions listed by real dictionaries. This is what they're demanding your respect for!
Can Dialectics Break Bricks?.jpg
(21.8KB, 274x363)
I use philosophy as self-defense.
>>1314
Bah to Empiricism! No different from Because! Another excuse for Certainty, just like Ought. Scientists are still ever the fools, just as like the Philosophers too. In Ignorance, accidental irradiation may taste better than drinking wolfsbane I'd wager.
Two sides of a coin, Science and Philosophy are. The game-piece of the game of Investigation outside the Mind. Good enough only what they are good at and nothing more. But funny enough, noboy ever talks about the Side of the coin. Like two ends of string endlessly flayed, Science and Philosophy seem still to be the same to me. But we are the string and the side, I think. What works, works.
philosophy of science, chechmate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

xglrvlfld9ue1.png
(5.1MB, 2559x1439)
mqdefault.jpg
(14.2KB, 320x180)
then they made a far more powerful one that can run tetris, calculators, game of life, etc.webp
(50.2KB, 971x931)
DOOM porting (camera).webp
(11.1KB, 812x449)
raytracing in MS Excel.jpg
(33.2KB, 650x366)
The sandbox game even a sandbox itself interrelates with the absurdist notion of meaning. It can be seen as a microcosm of the world, the freedom it [can] afford us, and how people react to it.

Let's talk about:
-><- Directions people have drawn from neutral sandboxes
-><- Extension of games to subvert their assumed meaning, or create new goals
-><- Self-imposed challenge
-><- The extension of "mere entertainment" into larger applications

Supplementary viewing: "Line Rider: The Gamification of an Art Medium"
https://youtube.com/watch?v=HJP1lXzm7-c

A Traditionalist Confronts Fascism.jpg
(44.7KB, 324x500)
At what point, specifically, did the objective of science become a means to control nature rather than understand it?
Replies: >>1648 >>1650
>>1647 (OP) 
>the objective of science
Never.
>an objective of science
Ancient times. The entire concept of civilization is a bold rejection of nature.
Replies: >>1649
>>1648
>The entire concept of civilization is a bold rejection of nature.
I've been SAYING this but nobody listens!
1671946826280.jpg
(42.9KB, 417x417)
>>1647 (OP) 
>Julius Evola
That dude actually did magick?
>Traditionalist against fascism
How?... wait, he want to turn back in time to roman paganism or something like that?
I remember mussolini was afraid of that dude.

Life simulation.jpg
(329.4KB, 1682x1260)
Can the theory of solipsism be reconciled with the theory that reality is an ultra-simulation?

I have always imagined that Real Reality (RR) is outside the simulation, something like in The Matrix when they are in those capsules, but on a local level. A technologically supra-advanced society that has these capsules in their homes, and when they get into the capsule, they enter the game (birth), something similar to GTA but taken to the extreme, where you think that is reality. Once you die, whether by accident or natural causes (of your avatar in the game), you wake up again in the capsule. For example, in RR hours have passed, but in the simulation you have experienced 80 years (or however long you last in it). Like virtual reality, but on such an immense scale that you enter the game itself (although it would only be your mind) and believe that the simulation is real, but in RR you are inside the capsule. And that is also why the deceased cannot return, because apart from being a simulation, upon re-entering the capsule, you would restart (be born again as a baby). After all, everything is code.

What do you think of my theory?
Replies: >>1644 >>1645
Cars are real. Cliffs are real. Cops are real.

Life ain't a damn video game, that's for sure.
aa308a1971a1d87c860f68c2304c884a.jpg
(57.4KB, 827x1024)
>>1642 (OP) 
>The Matrix
Matrix theories are just Gnostic ideas or Essence primordial outworld ideas (so, schizo but religious) but with more step into modern phenomena of quantum mysticism or psychobabble, computer and code and pop culture and sci-fi like Scientology lore.
So, to me its bullshit.
>Also
Sometimes maybe i believe there's something out of this place but i dont give a shit about it and its inexactly and non-explainable.
Bsck in time i got a schizo moment and ended believing in a lot of things similar to gnosticism and the matrix theories, why? i dont know, maybe the paranoid mindstate or the brain fucked.
Philiph K dick ended in the same way (he created the matrix) but he was more fully schizo and magick maybe.
Just read VALIS.
>>1642 (OP) 
>For example, in RR hours have passed, but in the simulation you have experienced 80 years
I've had a few dream experiences like that, where the passage of time in the dream state far exceeded the time for which I was actually sleeping. It was quite jarring. Hope those capsules come with a warning label and a toll free number to call in case of addiction like they have for compulsive gamblers in need of help.
12ccb3e8954466ed0a2dfb853182f251.jpg
(77.1KB, 627x799)
I feel reality is weirder than what most simulation theories aptly describe. The idea of there being NPCs or not and things being not really all that real and the afterlife being your real life or something aren't compatible with a few understandings those who have lived can tell you are true:
Life has its own will.
Your own will manifested through the personal, conscious exercise of it can make this will bend to your actions. Sometimes.
Your conscious will is nonetheless in synchrony with the Will. Life is a series of images of moments that have already passed.
Time is weird. Living is weird. Thinking you're inside a computer doesn't even come close to explaining all its oddities. Like meeting a woman and knowing you'll sleep with her. Like saying goodbye to another and nonetheless knowing there's more to come, in some way. Like your imagination showing you what you're meant for, from the moment of your birth, and guiding the way. Like dreams you've already had but forgot either in the future or the past resurfacing at a very exact moment to shock you, to tell you something. Like taking some action unconsciously and knowing it was necessary in a way or another. Like reading the way and the will and understanding them in their senselessness. Like chaos unfolding in order. Can simulations even be chaotic? Can the chaos of sex, of bonding, even be simulated in its entirety, the complete mess of insides turning into an absolute mess, glans coming together, fluids blending, s
Message too long. View the full text

Life death what actually happens.jpg
(387.9KB, 1108x1009)
Is dying real?
2b8a0d2bdf591f77479176520d4564a955ed01e8a3b76d421dda90c35a386eb9.png
(42.4KB, 764x644)
No, dying isn't real. In fact, the Bavarian Illuminati have killed a lot of people to try and cover this knowledge up.
d94ba6d376b10d022c01d363085d0d662c80d4daafcd66582b16918e01477a01.png
(190.4KB, 587x1075)
Fretting over the inevitability of death is like worrying about the inevitability of going to sleep at night.
I die every night and resurrect again each day

Show Post Actions

Actions:

- news - rules - faq - stats -
jschan+chaos 1.7.3
-><-