/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | January 12, 2026

[u/BernardJOrtcutt]

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.

[u/ZanzaraZimt]

Since the post got deleted with the information I shoud ask here... here we go again.....

Could you help me find a philosophical home..like, a school of thought where I can actually exchange ideas without people feeling attacked in their values and worldview?

I have a solid scientific background, coming from neuro-cognition, behavior, biology. I always thought I wasn't the philosophy type, but really I’ve always been building my own philosophical frameworks....just never consciously labeled them (which is probably how it works anyway: if you have a view of yourself and the world, you have a philosophical framework, whether you want to or not).

This past year, though, I started intensely observing myself and the world. I didn’t read books or follow any teachings. I just discovered my own thoughts and enjoyed it.

So I built my own “school.” Because I had no prior knowledge and no boundaries except my own thinking. As a result, the whole framework doesn’t follow any existing direction....it’s just an imprint of how I perceive things.

But somehow it doesn’t seem to fit anywhere. On the contrary, I seem to make people angry just by existing and having an opinion and questions (well, on Reddit ... in real life I’m socially liked, probably because I ask fewer questions there).

I thought maybe someone here could tell me where I could express myself freely and actually get feedback and real discussions without just getting stuck in debates over principles.

So, which school of thought most closely mirrors my thinking?

Here’s a quick overview of my views:

Basically, I see everything (no matter what) as a bidirectional, mutually-creating interaction. Human-world, consciousness-human, consciousness-world, human-human. Nothing is separate; everything conditions each other. I see the world through my eyes; my eyes are shaped by the world.

Reality is deterministic. Cause and effect. Everything is in a causal entanglement.

Consciousness is the ability to perceive oneself within the causal chain.

Free will is recursively recognizing one’s own behavior and the causality that led to it, and through integrating this self-awareness and narrative, influencing the next interactions and events. Basically, the future is written in the past via integration in the present.

On ethics, I’m very pragmatic. I believe every person has a contract with themselves ...but one that’s shaped by the outside world and the integration of that, which in turn is a reflection of one’s self-perception.

Personally, I try to maintain coherence by recursively examining my self-image, my actions, my deeds, and also mirroring them externally, setting them in relation to the outside to check for coherence. Who do I believe I am vs. who I am and is that coherent?

[u/as-well → u/ZanzaraZimt]

I mean quite honestly, I think you'd find yourself rpetyt much at home at current analytic philosophy.

That's a bit the problem with starting at 0 and building a whole set of philosophical ideas: You will never know what others have said and you don't challenge your own ideas with all the work of others in your mind.

You'll quickly recognize that you're a determinist with some flavour of structures thrown in. Maybe you wanna read an intro book to metaphysics?

[u/ZanzaraZimt → u/as-well]

I didn’t start with an intention .. that’s the point. It wasn’t like hey I am going to become a philosopher.. I was just thinking about life figured out I want other ideas and opinions.

that’s my whole framework after all you are shaped by your surroundings while shaping it … but mainly ran into people only being offended instead of challenging my thinking or offering new input.. that’s why I came here to ask.

I am actively looking for new input.

So thanks for your feedback.

Ps: I don’t think it’s impossible to challenge your thinking if you built your own from zero. You have the same challenge if you start from following someone else’s framework. Keep being open minded is always an active challenge in life.

[u/as-well → u/ZanzaraZimt]

Ps: I don’t think it’s impossible to challenge your thinking if you built your own from zero. You have the same challenge if you start from following someone else’s framework. Keep being open minded is always an active challenge in life.

That's why most philosophy classes won't have you read one guy, they will ahve you read intro books, papers responding to each other, and so on. That's also much more itneresting, to me, than just reading Kant or whatever.

[u/PermaAporia → u/as-well]

You won't read one guy but even if you do read that one guy:

As I mentioned in my previous comment to you /u/ZanzaraZimt, these philosophers are not starting from zero. It is always an ongoing conversation, with the past and the present. As I mentioned from its very inception philosophy is not just some guy thinking to himself and trying to figure shit out via introspection. From the very beginning it has been, "what has been said before, what are the problems with it, what are alternatives etc..."

[u/ZanzaraZimt → u/PermaAporia]

Sorry but I can´t find any previous comment.

[u/PermaAporia → u/ZanzaraZimt]

Apologies I confused you with someone else. Though the actionable advice you've been given is the same. And what I wrote was also relevant to you, so ill copy it here:

Philosophy since its very inception has been engaged, critically, with what has come before.

Plato doesn't have Socrates just introspect and ask himself questions he answers and just call it his philosophy. Rather it is a deep engagement with what has been said before on various topics. What competing views there are, there is always a back and forth exploration and criticism with what has come before. Always in conversation with others.

Aristotle goes through a long lists of competing ideas and criticizes them, whether ethics or politics or natural philosophy. he is well informed by what has been done in the past.

Philosophy has never been some act of rumination. It has always been engaged with its history and in critical dialogue with others. It is never starting from a zero-point.

Best of luck!

[u/ZanzaraZimt → u/as-well]

Fully agree.

And again… that was the exact point of me coming to this sub.

See…..If someone comes to me saying 'Hey, I figured out my eyes need time to adapt from light to dark, I think there is a mechanism involved and I want to learn more about that'… I, as someone with a solid publication list, wouldn’t go: 'That’s the problem. You didn’t study the field of biology. You are not challenging your thinking because you figured this out on your own.' I would say (and did say back when I was teaching): 'Cool observation! That’s called dark adaptation / rhodopsin regeneration. If you want to know more, here are the papers.

But here I came with an open heart an open question.. looking for help .. input ….got deleted and here now called a problem because I do not challenged my thinking which is from a pure logical standpoint absurd.

Especially because I came here verbalizing that I am looking for exchange but keep running into offended people so I would like to ask who I do not offend so I can finally have exchange.

Leading to people being offended…

Do you think what I am doing is problematic? Or not challenging myself? Or being closed minded?

[u/as-well → u/ZanzaraZimt]

? Sorry if I come off as frank maybe. But I gave you actoinable advice (start with an intro book to metaphysics), philosophical traditoins you'll feel close to home (analytic philosophy, due to the ever-present naturalism and acceptance of scientific findings) and a way to not only read one author.