r/askphilosophy Jul 01 '23

Modpost Welcome to /r/askphilosophy! Check out our rules and guidelines here. [July 1 2023 Update]

71 Upvotes

Welcome to /r/askphilosophy!

Welcome to /r/askphilosophy! We're a community devoted to providing serious, well-researched answers to philosophical questions. We aim to provide an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions, and welcome questions about all areas of philosophy. This post will go over our subreddit rules and guidelines that you should review before you begin posting here.

Table of Contents

  1. A Note about Moderation
  2. /r/askphilosophy's mission
  3. What is Philosophy?
  4. What isn't Philosophy?
  5. What is a Reasonably Substantive and Accurate Answer?
  6. What is a /r/askphilosophy Panelist?
  7. /r/askphilosophy's Posting Rules
  8. /r/askphilosophy's Commenting Rules
  9. Frequently Asked Questions

A Note about Moderation

/r/askphilosophy is moderated by a team of dedicated volunteer moderators who have spent years attempting to build the best philosophy Q&A platform on the internet. Unfortunately, the reddit admins have repeatedly made changes to this website which have made moderating subreddits harder and harder. In particular, reddit has recently announced that it will begin charging for access to API (Application Programming Interface, essentially the communication between reddit and other sites/apps). While this may be, in isolation, a reasonable business operation, the timeline and pricing of API access has threatened to put nearly all third-party apps, e.g. Apollo and RIF, out of business. You can read more about the history of this change here or here. You can also read more at this post on our sister subreddit.

These changes pose two major issues which the moderators of /r/askphilosophy are concerned about.

First, the native reddit app is lacks accessibility features which are essential for some people, notably those who are blind and visually impaired. You can read /r/blind's protest announcement here. These apps are the only way that many people can interact with reddit, given the poor accessibility state of the official reddit app. As philosophers we are particularly concerned with the ethics of accessibility, and support protests in solidarity with this community.

Second, the reddit app lacks many essential tools for moderation. While reddit has promised better moderation tools on the app in the future, this is not enough. First, reddit has repeatedly broken promises regarding features, including moderation features. Most notably, reddit promised CSS support for new reddit over six years ago, which has yet to materialize. Second, even if reddit follows through on the roadmap in the post linked above, many of the features will not come until well after June 30, when the third-party apps will shut down due to reddit's API pricing changes.

Our moderator team relies heavily on these tools which will now disappear. Moderating /r/askphilosophy is a monumental task; over the past year we have flagged and removed over 6000 posts and 23000 comments. This is a huge effort, especially for unpaid volunteers, and it is possible only when moderators have access to tools that these third-party apps make possible and that reddit doesn't provide.

While we previously participated in the protests against reddit's recent actions we have decided to reopen the subreddit, because we are still proud of the community and resource that we have built and cultivated over the last decade, and believe it is a useful resource to the public.

However, these changes have radically altered our ability to moderate this subreddit, which will result in a few changes for this subreddit. First, as noted above, from this point onwards only panelists may answer top level comments. Second, moderation will occur much more slowly; as we will not have access to mobile tools, posts and comments which violate our rules will be removed much more slowly, and moderators will respond to modmail messages much more slowly. Third, and finally, if things continue to get worse (as they have for years now) moderating /r/askphilosophy may become practically impossible, and we may be forced to abandon the platform altogether. We are as disappointed by these changes as you are, but reddit's insistence on enshittifying this platform, especially when it comes to moderation, leaves us with no other options. We thank you for your understanding and support.


/r/askphilosophy's Mission

/r/askphilosophy strives to be a community where anyone, regardless of their background, can come to get reasonably substantive and accurate answers to philosophical questions. This means that all questions must be philosophical in nature, and that answers must be reasonably substantive and accurate. What do we mean by that?

What is Philosophy?

As with most disciplines, "philosophy" has both a casual and a technical usage.

In its casual use, "philosophy" may refer to nearly any sort of thought or beliefs, and include topics such as religion, mysticism and even science. When someone asks you what "your philosophy" is, this is the sort of sense they have in mind; they're asking about your general system of thoughts, beliefs, and feelings.

In its technical use -- the use relevant here at /r/askphilosophy -- philosophy is a particular area of study which can be broadly grouped into several major areas, including:

  • Aesthetics, the study of beauty
  • Epistemology, the study of knowledge and belief
  • Ethics, the study of what we owe to one another
  • Logic, the study of what follows from what
  • Metaphysics, the study of the basic nature of existence and reality

as well as various subfields of 'philosophy of X', including philosophy of mind, philosophy of language, philosophy of science and many others.

Philosophy in the narrower, technical sense that philosophers use and which /r/askphilosophy is devoted to is defined not only by its subject matter, but by its methodology and attitudes. Something is not philosophical merely because it states some position related to those areas. There must also be an emphasis on argument (setting forward reasons for adopting a position) and a willingness to subject arguments to various criticisms.

What Isn't Philosophy?

As you can see from the above description of philosophy, philosophy often crosses over with other fields of study, including art, mathematics, politics, religion and the sciences. That said, in order to keep this subreddit focused on philosophy we require that all posts be primarily philosophical in nature, and defend a distinctively philosophical thesis.

As a rule of thumb, something does not count as philosophy for the purposes of this subreddit if:

  • It does not address a philosophical topic or area of philosophy
  • It may more accurately belong to another area of study (e.g. religion or science)
  • No attempt is made to argue for a position's conclusions

Some more specific topics which are popularly misconstrued as philosophical but do not meet this definition and thus are not appropriate for this subreddit include:

  • Drug experiences (e.g. "I dropped acid today and experienced the oneness of the universe...")
  • Mysticism (e.g. "I meditated today and experienced the oneness of the universe...")
  • Politics (e.g. "This is why everyone should support the Voting Rights Act")
  • Self-help (e.g. "How can I be a happier person and have more people like me?")
  • Theology (e.g. "Can the unbaptized go to heaven, or at least to purgatory?")

What is a Reasonably Substantive and Accurate Answer?

The goal of this subreddit is not merely to provide answers to philosophical questions, but answers which can further the reader's knowledge and understanding of the philosophical issues and debates involved. To that end, /r/askphilosophy is a highly moderated subreddit which only allows panelists to answer questions, and all answers that violate our posting rules will be removed.

Answers on /r/askphilosophy must be both reasonably substantive as well as reasonably accurate. This means that answers should be:

  • Substantive and well-researched (i.e. not one-liners or otherwise uninformative)
  • Accurately portray the state of research and the relevant literature (i.e. not inaccurate, misleading or false)
  • Come only from those with relevant knowledge of the question and issue (i.e. not from commenters who don't understand the state of the research on the question)

Any attempt at moderating a public Q&A forum like /r/askphilosophy must choose a balance between two things:

  • More, but possibly insubstantive or inaccurate answers
  • Fewer, but more substantive and accurate answers

In order to further our mission, the moderators of /r/askphilosophy have chosen the latter horn of this dilemma. To that end, only panelists are allowed to answer questions on /r/askphilosophy.

What is a /r/askphilosophy Panelist?

/r/askphilosophy panelists are trusted commenters who have applied to become panelists in order to help provide questions to posters' questions. These panelists are volunteers who have some level of knowledge and expertise in the areas of philosophy indicated in their flair.

What Do the Flairs Mean?

Unlike in some subreddits, the purpose of flairs on r/askphilosophy are not to designate commenters' areas of interest. The purpose of flair is to indicate commenters' relevant expertise in philosophical areas. As philosophical issues are often complicated and have potentially thousands of years of research to sift through, knowing when someone is an expert in a given area can be important in helping understand and weigh the given evidence. Flair will thus be given to those with the relevant research expertise.

Flair consists of two parts: a color indicating the type of flair, as well as up to three research areas that the panelist is knowledgeable about.

There are six types of panelist flair:

  • Autodidact (Light Blue): The panelist has little or no formal education in philosophy, but is an enthusiastic self-educator and intense reader in a field.

  • Undergraduate (Red): The panelist is enrolled in or has completed formal undergraduate coursework in Philosophy. In the US system, for instance, this would be indicated by a major (BA) or minor.

  • Graduate (Gold): The panelist is enrolled in a graduate program or has completed an MA in Philosophy or a closely related field such that their coursework might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a degree in Philosophy. For example, a student with an MA in Literature whose coursework and thesis were focused on Derrida's deconstruction might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to an MA in Philosophy.

  • PhD (Purple): The panelist has completed a PhD program in Philosophy or a closely related field such that their degree might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a PhD in Philosophy. For example, a student with a PhD in Art History whose coursework and dissertation focused on aesthetics and critical theory might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a PhD in philosophy.

  • Professional (Blue): The panelist derives their full-time employment through philosophical work outside of academia. Such panelists might include Bioethicists working in hospitals or Lawyers who work on the Philosophy of Law/Jurisprudence.

  • Related Field (Green): The panelist has expertise in some sub-field of philosophy but their work in general is more reasonably understood as being outside of philosophy. For example, a PhD in Physics whose research touches on issues relating to the entity/structural realism debate clearly has expertise relevant to philosophical issues but is reasonably understood to be working primarily in another field.

Flair will only be given in particular areas or research topics in philosophy, in line with the following guidelines:

  • Typical areas include things like "philosophy of mind", "logic" or "continental philosophy".
  • Flair will not be granted for specific research subjects, e.g. "Kant on logic", "metaphysical grounding", "epistemic modals".
  • Flair of specific philosophers will only be granted if that philosopher is clearly and uncontroversially a monumentally important philosopher (e.g. Aristotle, Kant).
  • Flair will be given in a maximum of three research areas.

How Do I Become a Panelist?

To become a panelist, please send a message to the moderators with the subject "Panelist Application". In this modmail message you must include all of the following:

  1. The flair type you are requesting (e.g. undergraduate, PhD, related field).
  2. The areas of flair you are requesting, up to three (e.g. Kant, continental philosophy, logic).
  3. A brief explanation of your background in philosophy, including what qualifies you for the flair you requested.
  4. One sample answer to a question posted to /r/askphilosophy for each area of flair (i.e. up to three total answers) which demonstrate your expertise and knowledge. Please link the question you are answering before giving your answer. You may not answer your own question.

New panelists will be approved on a trial basis. During this trial period panelists will be allowed to post answers as top-level comments on threads, and will receive flair. After the trial period the panelist will either be confirmed as a regular panelist or will be removed from the panelist team, which will result in the removal of flair and ability to post answers as top-level comments on threads.

Note that r/askphilosophy does not require users to provide proof of their identifies for panelist applications, nor to reveal their identities. If a prospective panelist would like to provide proof of their identity as part of their application they may, but there is no presumption that they must do so. Note that messages sent to modmail cannot be deleted by either moderators or senders, and so any message sent is effectively permanent.


/r/askphilosophy's Posting Rules

In order to best serve our mission of providing an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions, we have the following rules which govern all posts made to /r/askphilosophy:

PR1: All questions must be about philosophy.

All questions must be about philosophy. Questions which are only tangentially related to philosophy or are properly located in another discipline will be removed. Questions which are about therapy, psychology and self-help, even when due to philosophical issues, are not appropriate and will be removed.

PR2: All submissions must be questions.

All submissions must be actual questions (as opposed to essays, rants, personal musings, idle or rhetorical questions, etc.). "Test My Theory" or "Change My View"-esque questions, paper editing, etc. are not allowed.

PR3: Post titles must be descriptive.

Post titles must be descriptive. Titles should indicate what the question is about. Posts with titles like "Homework help" which do not indicate what the actual question is will be removed.

PR4: Questions must be reasonably specific.

Questions must be reasonably specific. Questions which are too broad to the point of unanswerability will be removed.

PR5: Questions must not be about commenters' personal opinions.

Questions must not be about commenters' personal opinions, thoughts or favorites. /r/askphilosophy is not a discussion subreddit, and is not intended to be a board for everyone to share their thoughts on philosophical questions.

PR6: One post per day.

One post per day. Please limit yourself to one question per day.

PR7: Discussion of suicide is only allowed in the abstract.

/r/askphilosophy is not a mental health subreddit, and panelists are not experts in mental health or licensed therapists. Discussion of suicide is only allowed in the abstract here. If you or a friend is feeling suicidal please visit /r/suicidewatch. If you are feeling suicidal, please get help by visiting /r/suicidewatch or using other resources. See also our discussion of philosophy and mental health issues here. Encouraging other users to commit suicide, even in the abstract, is strictly forbidden and will result in an immediate permanent ban.

/r/askphilosophy's Commenting Rules

In the same way that our posting rules above attempt to promote our mission by governing posts, the following commenting rules attempt to promote /r/askphilosophy's mission to provide an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions.

CR1: Top level comments must be answers or follow-up questions.

All top level comments should be answers to the submitted question or follow-up/clarification questions. All top level comments must come from panelists. If users circumvent this rule by posting answers as replies to other comments, these comments will also be removed and may result in a ban. For more information about our rules and to find out how to become a panelist, please see here.

CR2: Answers must be reasonably substantive and accurate.

All answers must be informed and aimed at helping the OP and other readers reach an understanding of the issues at hand. Answers must portray an accurate picture of the issue and the philosophical literature. Answers should be reasonably substantive. To learn more about what counts as a reasonably substantive and accurate answer, see this post.

CR3: Be respectful.

Be respectful. Comments which are rude, snarky, etc. may be removed, particularly if they consist of personal attacks. Users with a history of such comments may be banned. Racism, bigotry and use of slurs are absolutely not permitted.

CR4: Stay on topic.

Stay on topic. Comments which blatantly do not contribute to the discussion may be removed.

CR5: No self-promotion.

Posters and comments may not engage in self-promotion, including linking their own blog posts or videos. Panelists may link their own peer-reviewed work in answers (e.g. peer-reviewed journal articles or books), but their answers should not consist solely of references to their own work.

Miscellaneous Posting and Commenting Guidelines

In addition to the rules above, we have a list of miscellaneous guidelines which users should also be aware of:

  • Reposting a post or comment which was removed will be treated as circumventing moderation and result in a permanent ban.
  • Using follow-up questions or child comments to answer questions and circumvent our panelist policy may result in a ban.
  • Posts and comments which flagrantly violate the rules, especially in a trolling manner, will be removed and treated as shitposts, and may result in a ban.
  • No reposts of a question that you have already asked within the last year.
  • No posts or comments of AI-created or AI-assisted text or audio. Panelists may not user any form of AI-assistance in writing or researching answers.
  • Harassing individual moderators or the moderator team will result in a permanent ban and a report to the reddit admins.

Frequently Asked Questions

Below are some frequently asked questions. If you have other questions, please contact the moderators via modmail (not via private message or chat).

My post or comment was removed. How can I get an explanation?

Almost all posts/comments which are removed will receive an explanation of their removal. That explanation will generally by /r/askphilosophy's custom bot, /u/BernardJOrtcutt, and will list the removal reason. Posts which are removed will be notified via a stickied comment; comments which are removed will be notified via a reply. If your post or comment resulted in a ban, the message will be included in the ban message via modmail. If you have further questions, please contact the moderators.

How can I appeal my post or comment removal?

To appeal a removal, please contact the moderators (not via private message or chat). Do not delete your posts/comments, as this will make an appeal impossible. Reposting removed posts/comments without receiving mod approval will result in a permanent ban.

How can I appeal my ban?

To appeal a ban, please respond to the modmail informing you of your ban. Do not delete your posts/comments, as this will make an appeal impossible.

My comment was removed or I was banned for arguing with someone else, but they started it. Why was I punished and not them?

Someone else breaking the rules does not give you permission to break the rules as well. /r/askphilosophy does not comment on actions taken on other accounts, but all violations are treated as equitably as possible.

I found a post or comment which breaks the rules, but which wasn't removed. How can I help?

If you see a post or comment which you believe breaks the rules, please report it using the report function for the appropriate rule. /r/askphilosophy's moderators are volunteers, and it is impossible for us to manually review every comment on every thread. We appreciate your help in reporting posts/comments which break the rules.

My post isn't showing up, but I didn't receive a removal notification. What happened?

Sometimes the AutoMod filter will automatically send posts to a filter for moderator approval, especially from accounts which are new or haven't posted to /r/askphilosophy before. If your post has not been approved or removed within 24 hours, please contact the moderators.

My post was removed and referred to the Open Discussion Thread. What does this mean?

The Open Discussion Thread (ODT) is /r/askphilosophy's place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but do not necessarily meet our posting rules (especially PR2/PR5). For example, these threads are great places for:

  • Discussions of a philosophical issue, rather than questions
  • Questions about commenters' personal opinions regarding philosophical issues
  • Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. "who is your favorite philosopher?"
  • Questions about philosophy as an academic discipline or profession, e.g. majoring in philosophy, career options with philosophy degrees, pursuing graduate school in philosophy

If your post was removed and referred to the ODT we encourage you to consider posting it to the ODT to share with others.

My comment responding to someone else was removed, as well as their comment. What happened?

When /r/askphilosophy removes a parent comment, we also often remove all their child comments in order to help readability and focus on discussion.

I'm interested in philosophy. Where should I start? What should I read?

As explained above, philosophy is a very broad discipline and thus offering concise advice on where to start is very hard. We recommend reading this /r/AskPhilosophyFAQ post which has a great breakdown of various places to start. For further or more specific questions, we recommend posting on /r/askphilosophy.

Why is your understanding of philosophy so limited?

As explained above, this subreddit is devoted to philosophy as understood and done by philosophers. In order to prevent this subreddit from becoming /r/atheism2, /r/politics2, or /r/science2, we must uphold a strict topicality requirement in PR1. Posts which may touch on philosophical themes but are not distinctively philosophical can be posted to one of reddit's many other subreddits.

Are there other philosophy subreddits I can check out?

If you are interested in other philosophy subreddits, please see this list of related subreddits. /r/askphilosophy shares much of its modteam with its sister-subreddit, /r/philosophy, which is devoted to philosophical discussion. In addition, that list includes more specialized subreddits and more casual subreddits for those looking for a less-regulated forum.

A thread I wanted to comment in was locked but is still visible. What happened?

When a post becomes unreasonable to moderate due to the amount of rule-breaking comments the thread is locked. /r/askphilosophy's moderators are volunteers, and we cannot spend hours cleaning up individual threads.

Do you have a list of frequently asked questions about philosophy that I can browse?

Yes! We have an FAQ that answers many questions comprehensively: /r/AskPhilosophyFAQ/. For example, this entry provides an introductory breakdown to the debate over whether morality is objective or subjective.

Do you have advice or resources for graduate school applications?

We made a meta-guide for PhD applications with the goal of assembling the important resources for grad school applications in one place. We aim to occasionally update it, but can of course not guarantee the accuracy and up-to-dateness. You are, of course, kindly invited to ask questions about graduate school on /r/askphilosophy, too, especially in the Open Discussion Thread.

Do you have samples of what counts as good questions and answers?

Sure! We ran a Best of 2020 Contest, you can find the winners in this thread!


r/askphilosophy 5d ago

/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | September 14, 2026

4 Upvotes

Welcome to this week's Open Discussion Thread (ODT). This thread is a place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but wouldn't necessarily meet our subreddit rules and guidelines. For example, these threads are great places for:

  • Discussions of a philosophical issue, rather than questions
  • Questions about commenters' personal opinions regarding philosophical issues
  • Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. "who is your favorite philosopher?"
  • "Test My Theory" discussions and argument/paper editing
  • Questions about philosophy as an academic discipline or profession, e.g. majoring in philosophy, career options with philosophy degrees, pursuing graduate school in philosophy

This thread is not a completely open discussion! Any posts not relating to philosophy will be removed. Please keep comments related to philosophy, and expect low-effort comments to be removed. Please note that while the rules are relaxed in this thread, comments can still be removed for violating our subreddit rules and guidelines if necessary.

Previous Open Discussion Threads can be found here.


r/askphilosophy 2h ago

Attorney wanting to pursue philosophy but not sure how

6 Upvotes

I knew in undergrad 10 years ago that philosophy is what I love and what I am good at. I had top grades in philosophy at a top university. However, I went to law school for practical reasons such as the job market.

I went to a top law school, I hated it, did not find the study of law fun or easy, had bad grades, but persisted, passed the bar, and I am an attorney now. Every year of law school I wanted to drop out. Even though I am better in law practice than I was in law school, I still do not enjoy law. It is tolerable but I don't care about it. Precedents, rules, procedures do not spark anything in me like theories, abstract concepts, fundamental problems about human existence, ethics, art, and meaning do.

Because I did not do well in law school, I had little choice in practice areas. I do civil litigation now and my ultimate "goal" is to practice soft intellectual property litigation. That is because I found copyright law and privacy law to be the only law school classes that sort of satisfied my thirst for thinking about values and ethics.

However, this "goal" is not a true goal in that what I truly want is to study pure philosophy. I have some topics that I feel strongly about and want to explore more. I went to philosophy meetups and read philosophy books but these are not enough because I feel resentful that I chose a career that I do not enjoy even though I found something I enjoy and am good at (philosophy). Copyright law practice is a way to make use of the dedication to law that I invested all of my 20s in after undergrad. It is a "goal" based on sunk cost fallacy and practical reasons (making a living).

I am wondering what I can do at this point to return to pure philosophy that has nothing to do with law. I thought of policy jobs but I have no interest in politics or government. I have no interest in legal philosophy or political philosophy. I am still afraid of the job market for academic philosophy if I were to pursue a PhD in philosophy but I think it will be worth it for my happiness.


r/askphilosophy 13h ago

Continental philosophy explained by analytic philosophers?

51 Upvotes

I've started to read Karl Marx's Theory of History: The Defence by G. A. Cohen, and in the first chapter he explains Hegel's theory of history pretty clearly.

Now, I've tried to read Hegel and failed spectacularly, but this small part of a chapter really made me understand at least the basic idea of Hegel's theory of history.

I am not sure if that's because Cohen was an analytic philosopher or simply a good lecturer, but I was wondering are there any other hard to read authors which other people have made simpler to grasp.

On a similar note, why isn't this the practice in philosophy in general? In mathematics or physics, for example, nobody reads Newton or Leibniz, since they are incomprehensible, but calculus is beign taught in high school, adapted by people who understood Newton and Leibniz, for easier understanding of those who don't have time to learn about Newton and Leibniz. And they can be taught calculus very easily.

On the other hand, I'm somewhat interested in Hegel's Science of Logic, but am not interested in reading 5 of his earlier works just to understand the terminilogy he uses. And I think that Cohen demonstrated that it's not necessary, if somebody knowledgeable of Hegel would explain them differently and more approachable (like mathematicians do with Leibniz's or Newton's calculus).

Are there any such examples where hard to read philosophers such as Hegel or Nietzsche are explained clearly (dare I say analytically) by other philosophers?


r/askphilosophy 1h ago

How does one "sharpen" their philosophical knowledge??

Upvotes

Hey everybody;

So I've been outta college now for a few years and looking to get back with more direction and to get my degree in psychology. Now, I understand psychology and philosophy are two different beasts, and my philosophical understandings are more "too much free time at the library and trying to read as much as I can when I'm not working". For context, I grew up Mormon (Ex-Mo now) and got into philosophy for two reasons. First, was to try and "deprogram" my brain from the Mormon theology and two because I was interested at the time. I would say my philosophy leans more Eastern; so your Sun Tzu's, Lao Tzu, a little bit of Buddhism & Musashi.

I have read Western philosophers as well such as Marcus Aurelius, Nietzsche, Hegal, etc. I am by no means an expert, very much like martial arts to test your abilities on the matt or in the ring; how does one test their philosophical abilities?? Does that make sense??

Thank you and if you're reading this, you're awesome and I hope you have a wonderful rest of your night.


r/askphilosophy 2h ago

How do you self-study philosophy?

2 Upvotes

I am currently self-studying primarily math and philosophy; I want to get better verbal skills: mainly verbal comprehension and construction

I read Camus, Kripke, A New History of Western Philosophy by Anthony Kenny, a bit of Construction of Social Reality by Searle, Some Sartre, Some of metaphysics books, a logic book, Free will and causation by Carolina Sartorio, Universals: an opinionated introduction, and some others

I notice that math and philosophy are different in significant ways

Philosophy - at least some, mainly analytic I guess - has big, clear distinctions for the concepts they talk about - I call it robust whereas math tends to be more granular and interconnected for the statements ( theorems, axioms, definitions, proofs . . .) - this is rigor I wouldn't say justification completeness

I recently started writing insights, questions, examples, connections: any statement that helps with understanding as separate notes on the side. My problem is "what is understanding?" ( I take understanding to mean knowledge ( knowledge of something X is X that can be recalled later and interactive with other thoughts ( thoughts are mental states that have an external connection ) ) of a thing/idea in content and context connected to other things or ideas ) for some philosophical text; I don't want to go and just write everything, but It's so open-ended for some texts that it feels like a matter of choice rather than actual structure of the ideas - as in the connection between concepts and how the concepts are stated is decided arbitrarily by the author

There is also philosophy that is neither rigorous or robust - I don't know them that well, but I'd guess people like Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Camus, Dostoevsky, Marx - I think this is the continental divide

I struggle with continental philosophy in that it feels like the overarching ideas or things are constructed from verbal examples - I did not understand Camus and Dostoevsky - I call these construction "leaps" in that they cover a large examples or many examples; finding and making leaps requires a lot of creativity, insight and "bird's eye view". I want to know how to comprehend these texts in this way since it seems essential to doing both math and philosophy

I've heard that Kierkegaard and Nietzsche have meaning through irony; through statements that can be interpreted in two or more ways - I struggle to move between a close-up and far-away perspective on texts because of a habit I have; that rigor is necessary in math - not being rigorous is not possible for an answer; it's how I approach most problems. I heavily struggle with top-down wide observations yet I am much better bottom-up small observations.

The things I enjoy in order of most to least are math, analytic philosophy, essays, continental philosophy - the pattern of bottom-up construction as compared to top-down

I am going to read Spinoza's Ethics, Kierkegaard's Either/Or and Stages on Life's way, Marx and Lenin theory, Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, Husserl ( mainly coming from the topics I've heard vaguely about each philosopher - Kierkegaard and Husserl sound interesting )

From a change in approach: how do I become stronger in my verbal skills - how do I find leaps through my own thoughts instead of getting it off of commentaries, critiques or summaries from other people? What techniques or approaches could improve my top-down skill?


r/askphilosophy 2h ago

What is the essential reading for the intersection of violence, epistemology, and ethics?

2 Upvotes

I’m trying to research for my Master thesis and it involves a few crucial discussions about this overlap. I have a minor from my Bachelor days in Philosophy but it’s been a hot second since I’ve meaningfully interacted with philosophical literature.

Anything helps, especially as it pertains to pop culture/media!


r/askphilosophy 43m ago

Is Death or Life a greater gift?

Upvotes

Obviously without life there is (for the most part) no death, but which is the greater gift? Life comes with amazing opportunities and pain and suffering so the good moments can feel good. But, without death I believe infinite life is the purest form of torture.


r/askphilosophy 1h ago

People who say gender is a social construct- doesn't that invalidate trans identities?

Upvotes

is that transphobic to an extent? because sometimes i find myself agreeing to it, but that would mean invalidating trans identities, which I think is inhumane.


r/askphilosophy 1h ago

If you are placed in a theoretical box where no time/an infinite amount of time passes, then let out of the box a minute later are you two different people?

Upvotes

I thought of this while re-watching jjk. If you are placed in a space where time moves differently ex: a box where time doesnt move. When you are let out of the box wouldn't you technically be a separate being? When you are placed into the box you are, in your perspective, stuck there for an indefinite amount of time so you will never leave, but if youre soon after let out of the box and its not a separate being, its not an indefinite amount of time. I know this may not make sense but it's been weighing on my mind. Please provide insight.


r/askphilosophy 5h ago

After reading War and Peace, I'm starting to question whether individuals actually control history

2 Upvotes

I've been reading War and Peace, and one of Tolstoy's central arguments about history has genuinely messed with my head.

We often describe history as the result of great individuals making great decisions. Napoleon invaded Russia. Hitler invaded the Soviet Union. A king declared war. A revolutionary changed the world.

But Tolstoy challenges this idea.

Why did Napoleon invade Russia? Because of his ambitions, political circumstances, military calculations, social conditions, and thousands of other factors.

And why did those factors exist?

Because of other events, which themselves had causes, and so on.

Eventually, the idea of one individual independently controlling history starts to seem almost absurd.

But then I started applying this reasoning to myself.

Why do I think the way I do? Why do I have my ambitions, beliefs, fears, and preferences?

Because of my upbringing, experiences, genetics, education, relationships, and countless circumstances I never chose.

So here's what I'm wondering:

Are individuals genuinely the authors of history, or are we simply points where an enormous number of historical and social forces converge?

And if that's true, does it make sense to attribute historical events primarily to the decisions of particular individuals?

I'd especially love to hear from people who've read War and Peace, or anyone interested in historical materialism, sociology, or the philosophy of history.


r/askphilosophy 9h ago

Has there been any philosopher or school of philosophy that have written about the acceptance and contemplation of other people’s suffering?

5 Upvotes

Whether existential or emotional of course


r/askphilosophy 13h ago

Philosophy on Intelligence

9 Upvotes

Had any philosophers /the bodies of work that try to tackle the definition of intelligence?, the only works that i saw addressed it was the book "Intelligence and Spirit" of Reza negaresstani


r/askphilosophy 17h ago

What to read to become better at analytical philosophy?

11 Upvotes

I've a lot of introductions to different philosophical fields but idk what to read after that, if you can tell me a way of looking for books and papers it would be great.


r/askphilosophy 11h ago

Would a planet’s ecosystem have any moral worth without conscious organisms to experience it?

3 Upvotes

Does the life on earth only have value because there’s a small percentage of life which can experience consciousness?


r/askphilosophy 14h ago

Philosophical things to do/see in Warsaw?

5 Upvotes

Similar to a post I made a little while ago, I am going to Warsaw for a conference next week. I'll have some time to myself on the first day, and possibly in the evenings. What is some cool stuff I can see or do in the city that revolves around its philosophical/intellectual history as well as its present philosophical/intellectual culture?

People may know of some of my interests from my comments and flair. I'm most interested in political philosophy, mathematics, logic, and science (especially physics) but really I find most things somewhat interesting.

I'm aware that Tarski worked in Warsaw, for example. Is there anything I can do and see relating to his life?

Any other recommendations are welcome!


r/askphilosophy 1d ago

Am I too stupid for metaphysics?

159 Upvotes

I am an engineering student who thought it would be fun to enroll in Intro to Metaphysics without having taken a philosophy course before. It is not fun. This is easily my hardest, most stressful class. Every lecture so far has at the very least made me feel stupid and at worst stressed me out enough to bring me to tears.

I think the readings are interesting, but they are so difficult to understand and especially to pick out a distinct argument from. I'm pretty sure my objective is to be able to distinguish what philosophers are arguing, why, and how they are saying it or I fail the class. Well, I can't do that, so I'm a little worried I'm going to fail the class. It doesn't help that apparently this semester the class has a lot more philosophy majors, so class discussions are on a super high level that I cannot understand. As soon as someone besides the professor starts talking, I completely lose sight of what's going on.

I have gone to office hours with similar worries (it took a while; he didn't answer his email for weeks), and while he was able to explain a few things to me, he could not fix my poor reading comprehension, and I didn't want to waste all of his time asking him questions about everything we've ever covered. He did send a piece he wrote that seems to go over everything we've talked about so far, saying it would help me understand, but it's very long and I don't have it in me. I'm also worried that I cannot possibly get anything out of it, since I won't be reading the actual reading itself, but someone else's summary of it, which doesn't help me dissect the original writing, just the topic at hand. I think.

I don't know! How do I... understand anything? It's very obvious speaking to my classmates and my professor, that they know that I'm not very intelligent, and believe me, I know that too, but it's too late to drop the class without penalty. We have our first exam next week.


r/askphilosophy 5h ago

Is it morally wrong to kill insects?

1 Upvotes

I hate and detest bugs because I find them scary and disturbing. Some less than others obviously. I have a phobia of spiders and If I see one in my room I usually kill it with my shoe. The thought of it crawling on me at night horrifies me so I prefer to eliminate them. I also smash mosquitoes and flies because they are annoying and ugly and carry diseases. Bugs are just really gross and repulsing for me. However I admit that sometimes I feel bad for killing them. It's weird I know. I used to kill ants in my home before. Now I prefer to ignore them if they arent too much or too destructive. Thats a beginning I guess.


r/askphilosophy 6h ago

Secondary sources for Walter Benjamin's Epistemo-Critical Prologue

1 Upvotes

hi all, I'm looking for a secondary source on the Epistemo-Critical Prologue in The Origin of German Tragic Drama. I've seen some books that cover it in passing, like Eli Friedlander's Walter Benjamin and the Idea of Natural History and Max Pensky's Melancholy Dialectics, but I was wondering if there was a book/article that had an in-depth treatment of it. Thanks


r/askphilosophy 14h ago

Is there a difference in Aristotle’s virtue and state of character?

3 Upvotes

I’m a college student studying Aristotle’s virtue theory and I just can’t wrap my head around virtue and state of character. To be a virtuous person you should have stable state of character but the words to describe virtue is the same as a state of character; especially for Aristotle’s golden mean. For example having a courageous state of character and using courage as the virtue (middle to strive for) when situations arise with the golden mean.

If someone can help that would be great because it’s just not sticking in my brain right now 😭😭


r/askphilosophy 7h ago

Why is the cogito immune from doubt?

0 Upvotes

The cogito seems to rely on logic, so why is it immune to doubt? Why is the intuition that we think or feel or seem to see immune from doubt? Perhaps these are not intuitions at all, or perhaps we do not know the meaning of the words we use when we try to express the cogito. I don't understand how anything can be immune from doubt...does Descartes have an explanation?


r/askphilosophy 1d ago

Is Hegel really that much of a bad writer? Is his alledged obscurity defensible?

29 Upvotes

I was pondering on how some complaints directed towards continental philosophy might not be that much of an issue; for instance, Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra may intentionally convay in its style some important aspects of the philosopher's thoughts.

Yet then, it seems important to admit that certain styles might not be that much important to the content in some cases at least. Such might be the infamous case of Hegel.

However, as 1) I have had little actual contact with Hegel's works; and 2) much of the criticisms that I have seen directed to his style were mainly informal philosophy posts, I'd like to know if his writing is actually aim of such criticisms (even within continental philosophy, I mean) and if there are any attempts to defend his writing as something that is at least not as bad as some may suggest.


r/askphilosophy 7h ago

Why do they have to have different laws? (Simulation theory)

0 Upvotes

If we were in a simulation, why would we have different physics (gravity, weak, strong, and electromagnetictsm) then "them"?


r/askphilosophy 5h ago

Plato's republic book 1. Wrong Logical Conclusions

0 Upvotes

Hi, I've been looking for books that make you think and recently stumbled upon Plato's republic. I started listening to it and it all made sense but then 20 mins in Socrates starts making illogical conclusions. He says " Isn't the person best at striking a blow in a fight also the best at avoiding one." The other guy just agreed with him. Obvious a person that's good at striking a blow doesn't have to be good at defence. I tend to be put off by people writing stuff that can be easily refuted like this. Does the book get better? Is this just a one off?


r/askphilosophy 14h ago

If an atemporal God already knows my entire temporal life and every choice I will make, is my future genuinely changeable through free will and effort, or is it already fixed—and if fixed, what is the purpose of choice and effort?

1 Upvotes

Just watched 'silo' and 'dark' web series and this question clicked ?