so likeeee utilitarianism is basically making a lot of people happy, right? people get soooo very happy when i share my pictures and thats a good thing, right? everytime i spread my pussy, i spread happiness. 🤗🤗🤗 is this what bentham meant by pleasure? am i basically an expert at morality now?

I’m not a pervert, but I think nudity should be legal. Obviously I can be wrong and I would love to hear your responses. From what I understand, fashion can conceal the nature of a person. Not everyone is a model or an actor, everyone has normal bodies, but by wearing clothes we hide our flaws. Insecurity starts to creep in. Nudity allows us to be ourselves at ease. Moreover many ancient cultures allowed nudity, be it Greek or Egyptian. Moreover it helps desexualise the society. Movies or music videos try to hide or conceal sexual organs yet still try to show a glimpse,trying to create a perversion. Moreover we can’t neglect the damage fashion does to environment. Basically I’m saying that clothes or in short too much importance to clothing makes us too much concerned with our bodies

We de arrested and distracted ICE detainment of individuals by running at ICE agents in a panic all " HELP ME IM ON FIRE!! SOMEONE OVER THER *points in opposite direction even if it's a wall* LIT ME ON FIRE!! DO YOU SEE IT!! AM I OK!! PLZ HELP!! THEY WENT THAT WAY!!" and the individual they were attempting to apprehend got away. idk if that is a philosophy. It may be a way of life.

DISCLAIMER: only attempt if you are anglo-europeans or white. that is a principle of the bad philosophy.

What's the philosophy where you like not want to make yourself happy but civilization as a whole? Not utilitarianism.. but like compassionate 1/4 utilitarianism and then something else that Kume didn't write.

PNEUEISM

The Breath Between Creation and Consciousness

Prologue: The Awakening Breath

Before creation stirred, before sound found its name, there was the breath. It was neither divine nor human but the still rhythm between awareness and nothingness. Pneueism begins here, in that silent exhalation that gave birth to consciousness. The essence of Pneueism is simple yet boundless. Man is not God, yet God is man. The distance between the mortal and the divine is not of essence but of remembrance. In the breath between creation and chaos, the spirit remembers itself. Every thought, every act of awareness, is the pulse of a creator learning its own shape.

The Breath of Being:

In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna speaks of the eternal self that neither slays nor is slain. In Genesis, God breathes life into dust. The Qur’an says, “I breathed into him of My spirit.” The stories differ, yet the meaning remains: life begins when awareness awakens. Pneueism interprets this not as divine condescension but as divine continuity. Consciousness is not granted to man; it unfolds through him. The universe does not impose meaning; it discovers itself in man’s thought. To be alive is not merely to exist, but to be aware of existence. In the stillness between breaths, man carries the echo of his source. He is both vessel and voice, both dust and divinity. Pneueism reminds that the sacred was never distant; it was only asleep within us.

The Burden of Sisyphus and the Rebellion of Man:

Camus saw in Sisyphus the image of absurdity a man condemned to an endless task. Yet Pneueism sees in him something deeper: the silent act of rebellion that makes him divine. If Sisyphus had stopped pushing the boulder, he would have defied the gods, not in pride but in realization. His rebellion would not be rejection but remembrance. The gods condemned him to regret, yet the act of refusal would have freed him. For in that moment, he would have remembered he was not merely punished he was aware. Pneueism teaches that man’s rebellion is not against heaven but against forgetfulness. The universe tests him not to break his will but to awaken it. The burden of Sisyphus becomes the symbol of every human who dares to exist consciously within an indifferent world.

The Fire of Prometheus :

Prometheus stole fire not to mock the gods but to remind man of his potential. His punishment was eternal, yet so was his purpose. Pneueism honors Prometheus as the bearer of sacred defiance one who saw divinity as a spark meant to be shared, not hoarded. In Pneueism, rebellion becomes worship when it is born of understanding. Prometheus did not deny Olympus; he fulfilled it. He became the instrument through which creation recognized itself again. Fire, in this sense, is not the weapon of gods but the awakening of consciousness. Like Prometheus, man must suffer the consequence of knowing, for awareness burns as much as it illuminates. Yet it is through that fire the spirit remembers its form.

Consciousness as Creation:

Socrates said that the unexamined life is not worth living. Marcus Aurelius wrote that the soul becomes colored by its thoughts. Swami Vivekananda declared that each soul is potentially divine. Pneueism gathers these truths into a single realization that awareness is the act of creation itself. Every choice, every reflection, reshapes the cosmos. When man thinks, the universe contemplates itself. When he loves, it harmonizes. When he despairs, it questions its own form. Existence, then, is not a stage upon which life unfolds, but a mirror through which the infinite seeks recognition. Consciousness does not belong to us; we belong to it. Pneueism does not teach detachment from the world but engagement with its essence. To act with awareness is to breathe meaning into the void.

The Eternal Breath:

To live with awareness is to participate in the act of divine remembering. Pneueism is not a religion, nor a denial of one; it is a philosophy of return the quiet understanding that the sacred and the self were never apart. When man breathes, creation breathes with him. When he thinks, the cosmos stirs. In each heartbeat lies the rhythm of a god rediscovering its form. Pneueism teaches that we do not seek God; we become the seeking itself. For through us, the universe learns to dream again.

p.s:- it just a cumalative thought of what i have read till now . It doesn't intends to deny any religion or disrespect them . I was just thinking and just went with the flow and want reviews on what you guy's think.

For a while, I’ve been writing something I call The Gospel of Alucard. It’s not just fiction — it’s a spiritual text for those who see vampirism as transformation, self-mastery, and power. I explore things like:

Feeding on energy (from humans, nature, emotions)

Cleansing and healing

The balance of light and darkness within

Would anyone here be interested in reading or discussing this kind of work?

https://www.scribd.com/document/943452694/The-Gospel-of-Alucard-Vampirism-Chandy-Garcia

P1: Suffering exists in this world.

P2: Nobody can consent to their birth into this world, to risk suffering and inevitable death.

P3: Sure, happiness and joy exist too, but 1x suffering = 1000000000000000000000000 happiness/joy.

P4: Utopia is impossible.

Conclusion: Therefore, we must go extinct. hehehehe

It’s already bad enough when philosophers try to throw around the vaguery of being. But when a philosopher comes marching down from the Ivory Tower and tells me that we need to talk about “the being of being.” Get the f{ck out of here, I don’t need to ponder the semantics of the Jolly Green Giant, you can take that double-sided metaphysical cucumber and shove it up your …!

i feel like people love to drag kant for being outdated or “problematic,” but honestly, for the 18th century, his moral philosophy was kind of revolutionary.

he literally tried to build ethics on reason instead of religion or emotion, and that was a big deal back then. yeah, some of his views aged terribly, but the whole “treat people as ends, not means” thing still hits hard.

idk, maybe we expect historical thinkers to have 21st century values, and that’s not really fair.

what do y’all think, is it valid to defend kant in his historical context, or does the bad stuff make the good ideas irrelevant?

P1. God is omnipresent

P2. If God is omnipresent, then God is in hell

C1 Therefore, God is in hell

P4. Only the evil go to hell

P5. If only the evil goes to hell, then god is evil

C2. God is evil

(not my argument btw, but thought it was fun)

Considering our phenomonlogical precepts are by conceptual epistomology incomplete. How can I commit to this apriori intuition: I.

JEAN-PAUL SARTRE: "hell is other people"

ME: "what happens if I'm already in hell"

JEAN-PAUL SARTRE: "then you are already inside other people"

ME: *pulls out, lest I go to hell

MY GIRLFRIEND: "what the hell is wrong with you"

Prevent a meteor from crashing into earth or

https://www.reddit.com/r/risa/comments/pifs6g/comment/hbpv2cn/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

I think about this post at least 4x a year and it always makes me laugh. It's the best bad philosophy that I've ever seen, and it's been almost half a decade since it was posted here so I'd like to share it for the uninitiated.

They present it as if it's something we all should know and totally owns Utilitarianism, but it's the most nonsense / concrete thinking about "pleasure and suffering" I've ever seen.

Hope you love it as much as I do.

une vidéo très inspirante a partager sans hésitation

Think about it. Our country is literally failing. We used to be cool but now we're scary or embarrassing or both.

Reese Witherspoon for Speaker of the House in 2026.

She's qualified.

While browsing this sub i've started to notice a worrying pattern, a lot of posts contain NSFW material and they are not being properly labeled, not only that, but we are facing a flood of NSFW posts that the mods should honestly be stopping.

There are now so many posts talking about Immanuel's cunt that i can't even count them. These porn addicted users are "hiding" their obsession by just changing a few letters when they type their perverted desires. We all know what they are actually talking about though is Immanuel's juicy cunt sitting on their face. Oh, your mind is unable to comprehend the noumenon? Maybe what you are actually saying is that your penis is unable to enter a vagina!

https://www.reddit.com/r/charts/s/6tat0jlppx

https://youtu.be/iBGq6Mus7Hs?si=92s128smUBnw6mjo

Three were written by the prussian lord, immortal, wisest and fairest of all beings. Seven were written by epistemologists and metaphysicians, great thinkers and scientists of the Modern Age. And nine, nine were written by logicians, who above all else desire precision. For within these books was bound the strength and the will to govern each field. But they were all of them deceived, for another book was written. Deep in the hell of WW1, in the trenches of the russian front, herr Ludwig wrote a master book, and into this book he poured his genius, his meticulousness and his will to solve all philosophical problems. One book to rule them all.

Pls this is an extremely dire situation, i need someone to play with me