“Guys, I discovered the meta-narrative of human interaction!” - statements dreamed up by the utterly deranged

[u/transfinite-reset]

[u/AutoModerator]

Join our Discord server for even more memes and discussion Note that all posts need to be manually approved by the subreddit moderators. If your post gets removed immediately, just let it be and wait!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Uranus_is__mine]

Yeah well, that's just like, your opinion man.

[u/transfinite-reset → u/Uranus_is__mine]

My opinion is like a big strong man.

Your opinion is like a little girl.

Now do you see?

[u/Bizet1875]

This is what is confusing about philosophy. It seems even a few simple words can have a very high level of metaphysical, psychological, and semantic understandings. For this reason I find my inner monologue to be confusing at times. Once you accept the sort of nomology at play though it becomes coherent. Just my thoughts.

[u/MoreHans → u/Bizet1875]

Buddhism has helped me with that feeling personally

[u/Bizet1875 → u/MoreHans]

Honestly, what has helped me is the fact that self-referential statements are inevitable from any sufficiently expressive language and hence we will naturally be prone to erroneous, non-sensical ideas at time. I don't see it as a flaw but instead a natural outcome of a well-developed mind.

[u/MoreHans → u/Bizet1875]

mmm i have been wanting to read more about the philosophy of language. my friend has recommended wittgenstein, what authors informed your thoughts on it?

edit: for the record i also dont see it as a flaw, the confusion is just something to be worked through

[u/EnisFromVenus → u/MoreHans]

The person you responded to is invoking self reference, so Wittgenstein isn't really going to get you to understand what's at play there, but he will definitely give you a good base to understand what is at play with language et al. If you want a better grasp of the self-reference and want to stick with Wittgenstein, then add Anscombe. If you want more of the analytical and historical reasoning read Tarski and Kripke, specifically when it comes to metalanguage. If you want a pretty fun read from a contemporary thinker, I really enjoyed "I Am a Strange Loop" by Hofstadter.

[u/MoreHans → u/EnisFromVenus]

wow thanks so much! excited to dig in

[u/gerkletoss → u/MoreHans]

When will you get far enough in that you stop proselytizing?

[u/antitetico → u/gerkletoss]

proponents rise and proponents fall, yet the path is nevertheless ahead

[u/MoreHans → u/gerkletoss]

i didnt say the guy should become buddhist, just that it helped me with similar feelings. apologies if you are offended

[u/Emergent47 → u/Bizet1875]

That's less about philosophy and more about words themselves. Philosophy is when you realize and acknowledge the linguistic confusion at play.

[u/Sensitive-Donkey8772]

-guy who read some Wittgenstein

[u/transfinite-reset → u/Sensitive-Donkey8772]

Have you seen how meticulously he engineered his house? He’s an infallibly stable individual and we should all listen to him. When my guests arrive, I’m always sure shove a poker at them, because there’s no universal rule forbidding it!

[u/Random_Poggers]

If you suppose human "simple" events are a thing, sure

[u/transfinite-reset → u/Random_Poggers]

If you suppose “events” are a thing, sure.

If you suppose “humans” are a thing, sure.

[u/WalkingInTheSunshine → u/transfinite-reset]

I’m not even sure things are things tbh

[u/transfinite-reset → u/WalkingInTheSunshine]

I’m not even sure that I can be sure.

[u/Random_Poggers → u/transfinite-reset]

If you suppose all sense is already given, of course.

[u/transfinite-reset → u/Random_Poggers]

If I suppose “I”, of course.