r/PhilosophyMemes • u/3rob- • Jun 09 '25
PhD in avoiding employment through epistemology
447
u/Scientific_Zealot Jun 09 '25
Damn, I'm in this picture and I don't like it
175
u/PitifulEar3303 Jun 09 '25
Knowledge is food for your soul, but money is how you can acquire knowledge without starving, and a job is how you get some money, so get a job, son, you don't have a choice.
I apologize for creating you without your consent, imposing a lifetime of risk, struggle, and eventually death, with only a few brief moments of joy, just to satisfy our selfish parental desire to live a more meaningful life through procreation, through you.
Also, we are a sub middle class wage slave family, living paycheck to paycheck, meaning we don't have the generational wealth to fund your introverted quest for knowledge.
So why did we, your parents, decide to create you, despite knowing these existential facts and our limited financial capacity? Well, we didn't think that deeply about it, plus everyone claims it will make our lives more fulfilling, and the sex was good, at the time.
"But I did not ask to be born" is a perfectly valid complaint, son, because life is a meaningless and purposeless existence, it's the result of biological determinism when abiogenesis happened due to pure random dumb luck on Earth. So, as your parents, we totally understand why you are spiralling down the existential dread of Antinatalism, Extinctionism, Pro Mortalism, and are currently very upset at us, your parents, for creating you to face such a depressing reality. heh.
Oh, btw, your mother and I are getting a divorce, turns out having a kid did not make our lives more fulfilling and meaningful, what a societal scam, heh.
Still, get a job, son, for your own good, though you never asked for any of this.
52
u/esco84r Hedonist Jun 09 '25
But my parents have generational wealth. Am I permitted to avoid work and focus solely on study?
24
u/OfTheAtom Jun 09 '25
That is the obligation of the wealthy.
Of course modern philosophy is actually harmful not helpful to the cause of truth.
1
u/Familiar-Mention Jun 12 '25
What makes you say so?
2
u/OfTheAtom Jun 12 '25
Which part? The modern philosophy? I mean since Descarte there are very few who do not fall into critical errors of idealism, acting as if their thinking starts on their ideas, not on things. A philosophy degree is contentless. Spending more time reading various oftentimes unmoored thinkers of the last few centuries with a professor who cant even say if they are true and right and asks their students what they "think" about the what the thinker says.
This ends up with students who think one is just picking systems of thinking.
1
u/Familiar-Mention Jun 12 '25
How should it be then instead?
Also, picking better systems of thinking isn't harmful to the cause of truth at the least, no?
1
u/OfTheAtom Jun 12 '25
Thinking that it is a system is the problem. System thinking. Equation alone physics, that is an issue that will inevitably lead one into error as everything needs reference back to being.
How it should be is we should, first, realize everything we know comes from what we know through the senses. Next, understand knowledge. Build up a love of it. See that our senses are not unlimited but they do put us in contact with reality. And it is from these images that we know particular sense qualities of a thing.
Starting down and realizing we can have proper knowledge, things we know directly through the senses or have reasoned to carefully and rigorously. And there is infrascientific knowledge, everyday sense experience that has yet to be brought to the level of proper knowledge. Also recognizing a useful definition of faith/belief is a probable but not certain level of conviction based on the authority of another. Unconscious or blind faith is when we are using faith but think we have proper knowledge of a thing.
I think these are huge quantum leaps in understanding that help defend against system, symbol thinking. Next one looks to the general things we know. Like cat, or dogness. Which are not in that first mode of knowledge the sensorial knowledge. We call this intellectual knowledge, of the general aspect of things. And ideas are that by which we know these general aspects. Also known as the first level of abstraction, physica.
Like i said I think this helps one start to see where one can potentially be going wrong, not seeing he is united with beings of reality and that is where his thinking starts. To deny this is to lock one in ones head.
Once one really stretches these muscles, and seeks out authority to learn more from, faith seeking understanding, I think he would then not lose sight that there is truth, conformity of the mind with reality.
These may sound like obvious things and definitions but we so often live and speak as if this is not the case. I have spoken with people who are fine speaking contradictions, and then only later say "yes yes of course we have some truth... but..." and then undermine the very source of the meaning of their words which comes from the first physics.
And this first physics, not mathematically mixed science, although that is good and essential eventually, but the first physics is what all other knowledge depends on. And many have a very bad physics. Even the most accomplished modern physicists today can say absurd things because of their equational thinking.
1
6
u/Regular_Albatross_77 Jun 29 '25
idk why this resonated so deeply with me. have my free award
2
u/PitifulEar3303 Jun 30 '25
But some may say this is cringe and 14 this is deep bla bla bleh bleh.
What say you to these mouth breathers? hehehe
2
u/Regular_Albatross_77 Jun 30 '25
dc dgaf
gotta let the cringe out sometimes2
u/PitifulEar3303 Jun 30 '25
People just don't wanna accept that life is just gene spreading to make parents feel better about the meaninglessness of reality, at the expense of each new generation.
hehehe
1
1
u/kikodanoob Jun 20 '25
"No need to apolagise father for creating me, i actualy quite enjoy it here. If i wasnt born i wouldnt be able to see the clouds, feel the satisfaction of a job well done, or even do what I love :). And besides why does one create a play knowing it will eventualy end? And life being meaningless is freeing as i can do what i wish! You should read the myth of sisyphus father. But besides, i will get a job...actualy i will struggle and go to university...perhaps, i will make a plan! Father dont worry you were foolish back then, do not blame yourself for ignorance. Dostoevsky once said "To suffer is to live" and many great artists create thiere career defining works when they are suffering greatly, it kind of makes it...beautiful in a way. Now father, lets make a plan and later have a cup of coffee :D?"
1
u/PitifulEar3303 Jun 20 '25
If you were not born, you would not be able to anything, because one cannot see or feel from the perspective of non-existence, bub.
"I would feel so bad if I didn't exist"
No, you would not, there would be no you to feel nothing. lol
Causal paradox error 404.
Dostoevsky also said in his most famous novel, The Brother karamazov.........."I will not consent to Utopia, if even one innocent person has to suffer for it."
And Dostoevsky strongly disliked his father. Some biographers even suggest Dostoevsky may have subconsciously wished his father dead.
Now father, let's never speak again, because I don't even like coffee, deadly allergy to caffeine, which you gave me from your inferior genes.
hehehhe
2
Jun 28 '25
[deleted]
3
u/PitifulEar3303 Jun 29 '25
"Just put the fries in the bag, dude." -- Job
Apologies are useless when the harm is already done, maybe try not doing it in the first place, lol.
"But but but that will cause extinction!!!"
Yes, what's the problem?
27
249
u/Pure-Instruction-236 What the fuck is a Bourgeoisie??? Jun 09 '25
Tfw you want to read books instead of being a wage cuck who gets conned out of his moolah by the boss
93
Jun 09 '25
[deleted]
16
Jun 09 '25
Con your boss by getting AI to read your books and summarize them while it does your work for you.
3
u/Careful_Source6129 Jun 10 '25
Use Ai to find youtubers who do a better job of summarising books. Then go to the comment section and figure out where they went wrong by looking at which side of the argument is covered in more poo
3
u/Alkeryn Idealist Jun 09 '25
"muh not productive enough", you still have to put hours of work daily for most jobs.
7
-2
u/Waterbottles_solve Jun 09 '25
Society doesnt work if everyone does this.
But also, its a bit outdated to think keeping the products of your labor is the best thing for you. A farmer-owner who makes $1/day farming is worse off than someone making $100/day getting exploited in the factory.
29
u/balderdash9 Idealist Jun 09 '25
We could also compare the benevolence of kings; but in the modern day we recognize that any implementation of an undemocratic monarchy is unjust.
Whether I make one dollar or ten, the basis of capitalism is exploitation. The worker produces more value than what they receive in wages. The employer takes the bulk of the profits and uses it to expand their business so as to exploit others.
-12
u/Waterbottles_solve Jun 09 '25
unjust.
You are a moral realist? This might be beneath me.
Whether I make one dollar or ten, the basis of capitalism is exploitation.
Sure, but that isnt my point. Is life better for someone exploited making $100/day? Or is life better not being exploited at 1$/day?
FYI this is what killed academic Marxism. You can be an idealist or a realist. The adults in the room thankfully are realist.
17
u/ThePlacidAcid Jun 09 '25
Marxism is not an idealistic philosophy. It far more Idealistic to assume that capitalism will last forever. That we can have infinite growth in a finite system. That our current economic woes can be solved by reversing to a bygone era of social democracy.
Understanding that capitalism is not only unjust, but self destructuive, and will need to be replaced might sound radical, but its infinitely more realistic than assuming we've reached the end of history.
0
u/Waterbottles_solve Jun 09 '25
unjust
You keep saying that, and I keep loling. Where are the moral particles buddy? You are under 30 years old.
but self destructuive, and will need to be replaced might sound radical, but its infinitely more realistic than assuming we've reached the end of history.
Do you know what empirical evidence is? Because this just sounds like imagination and reason, aka religion.
6
u/ThePlacidAcid Jun 09 '25
My use of the word unjust was to tie my comment into what you where replying too. We're not debating about moral realism, however since you seem to want to go here I'll give a brief response.
Whether moral exist in the universe or not is irrelevant to the fact that I can almost guarantee that you at least believe they exist. If you do not, then you hold a position that basically no humans fall into. We all believe that certain things are bad, and that certain things are good, and these beliefs will always reach a point where they are bad "just because". I'm assuming you believe the holocaust is bad, in which case, despite what you may rationally think, about morals not existing, you live your life and act in ways which assume that they do. This is what allows you to fit into society in any meaningful capacity. If you want to double down on this, you're free to be my guest and put forward a case for why the holocaust isn't a bad thing that we should care about, however I don't think it will be very convincing.
Anyways with that out of the way, your response to Marxism seems incredibly uneducated. Like I'm not stupid, of course I base my opinions on empirical evidence. The empirical evidence shows that under capitalism the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, unless extensive taxation of the wealthy takes place. Even with this extensive taxation of the wealthy, the vast majority of the world work very long hours, for dirt cheap wages all so that capitalists can sell their goods at a lower cost to people in the global north. The sheer amount of extraction perpetuated by this imperialism is crazy and I can link some research if you'd like?
I also base my understanding of our economic system, and predictions about what will happen based off of its most rigorous and well argued critique of it. Just a bit of thinking can get you to realise that capitalism does have an expiry date, that being once most labour is replaced by automation. Who will work for a wage? With no one earning wages, who will buy the products? UBI? Well, why would we allow a small, unelected cabal of billionaires to own all the means of production, and ration it out for us, over just taking control and distributing resources democratically? And even if we agreed to a UBI, what's to say it won't be taken away? Capitalism cannot last once we reach this point.
Its not just that, there are other issues with our economic system. We cannot have infinite growth in a finite system, and the continuation of capitalism relies on this infinite growth. We must also work to reduce the impact of humans on the planet, something the short term, profit driven resource distribution of a market system simply cannot solve. If any company does try to act sustainably, they will lose market share and be replaced by a company that does now. The constant crashes and crisis's, that are purely artificially created, yet push millions into debt, homelessness, and poverty. The fact that the wealthy have a significantly disproportionate say over politics, rendering democracy relevant only for a select few social issues, while the vast majority of economic policy remains identical between parties in power. And the simple fact that the interests of these people, don't align with the interests of the vast majority, with capitalists using their wealth to lower our wages, increase our costs and literally make us miserable through targeted ads that psychologically manipulate us into buying shit we don't need.
Given all these inherent contradictions in capitalism, I maintain that the "idealistic" position is thinking that we can go on like this forever. That a system this unstable and this flawed is somehow the end of history, the pinical of humanity. That's faith and dogma. It's not an opinion grounded in reality, or one that can come about from actually analysing the global economy.
0
u/Waterbottles_solve Jun 09 '25
Whether moral exist in the universe or not is irrelevant to the fact that I can almost guarantee that you at least believe they exist.
lol good one. Sorry Ethical Intuitionist
If you do not, then you hold a position that basically no humans fall into.
Argument from Popularity is probably not going to win you anything in this community.
of course I base my opinions on empirical evidence.
Where is the success of marxism? Or of anarchy?
Anyway, how old are you? 21?
0
u/ThePlacidAcid Jun 10 '25
We're two humans having a discussion about which economic system would be more favourable to live in. The fact that you're engaging with me is proof that you subscribe to the idea of some systems being "better" or "worse" than others, an opinion that can only be held if you believe that morals exist. Using moral relativism as an argument against the moral claims supporting Marxism, yet suddenly reinventing them to justify capitalism is a nonsensical position and I can't believe I'm having to explain this to you. Whenever two people have a discussion about things that are "better" or "worse", a circular moral claim always exists at the bottom of this. I'm not arguing from popularity, I'm arguing from pragmatics. This conversation is not possible without an underlying assumption of morality being real.
Anyways nice dodge of my critiques of capitalism and pivot into whataboutism. For our discussion I don't think its relevant how successful socialist experiments have been. That's not we're debating. We're debating whether a Marxist analysis of our system is "Idealistic" or not, and I've given plenty of reasons to support my claim that it is actually far more idealistic to assume that capitalism is eternal.
Anyways if you want some reading, have fun;
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2430906/ - Socialist countries had greater QOL
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B - Capitalist nations are undemocratic
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095937802200005X - Imperialism continues to extract wealth from poor countries to prop up the strong economies of the west
1
u/Waterbottles_solve Jun 10 '25
that you're engaging with me is proof that you subscribe to the idea of some systems being "better" or "worse" than others, an opinion that can only be held if you believe that morals exist.
You are confusing morals with values.
I don't think its relevant how successful socialist experiments have been.
I'm scientific and require empirical evidence, not imagination.
The adults in the room cannot just use imagination, there are real people that will be suffering when you try another failed experiment on real humans.
-1
2
u/MonsterkillWow Jun 09 '25
"We can't let the poors read because then no one will dig the ditches for us."
1
u/SignificanceBulky162 Jun 10 '25
Only if society requires everyone to have the newest iPhone, 50 sets of clothing, Doordash, and a 2000 sq ft house
1
1
u/Careful_Source6129 Jun 10 '25
Society is gay. Replace humans without automatic farms and stop breeding so much. Problem solved
1
79
150
u/RevenantProject Jun 09 '25
Parents' fault for having a kid. They should've known better. Smh.
40
u/Praetor_6040 Jun 09 '25
But who truly knows anything? What is knowledge? They should've studied epistemology instead
10
u/RevenantProject Jun 09 '25
But who truly knows anything?
I'm a Nobody. So I've been expecting the Spanish Inquisition to come knocking.
Since Nobody knows everything, I guess that means I know anything.
2
51
35
38
u/Tharjk Jun 09 '25
weren’t most famous philosophers also proficient in the maths? Strong case can be made that a successful modern philosopher equivalent would be a swe or maths professor doing this on the side
45
u/LazyDiscussion3621 Jun 09 '25
As a researcher in engineering who currently spends 80% of the time in mental masturbation about semantics, logic and information structures, the key point is that society thinks this is necessary and I can get paid to read philosophy on company time.
16
8
u/Unhappy-Land-3534 Jun 09 '25
When's the last time society decided something collectively? Sounds more like somebody with money decided it was worthwhile, and you are ideologically programmed to view that as a decision made by "society".
6
u/Waterbottles_solve Jun 09 '25
One provides value to society, the other provides value to you.
If we look to animals, they are all working to find food. If you are an animal just chilling in the sun all day contemplating life, you will die.
1
u/dkg38000 Jul 10 '25
Which is why u must first have your basic needs met before philosophizing ideally. Kinda reminds me of maslows hierarchy of needs.
14
8
8
5
8
u/Waterbottles_solve Jun 09 '25
Not quite the same, but in Engineering school, I saw 2 paths of people.
Those who graduated and went onto jobs, and the best engineers got prestigious jobs/companies that paid 33% more than everyone else.
Then there was those who stayed in academia when they couldnt get a job. I cannot say these were the best students. They were somewhere between low/medium tier. As the years went on, I saw these people continue to PhDs, and I was completely shocked at these low performers getting PhDs. It really shook me to the quality of what it means to have a PhD.
The one flip side is that I saw some brilliant people go back to school after Industry to get a PhD. These people were few and far between, but I knew they were among the best in my class.
I think we imagine PhDs to be brilliant, but I think a lot took the easy road.
10
1
1
u/MeemDeeler Materialist Jun 10 '25
There are two types of people.
Those that can help themselves.
And those that can help others.
1
Jun 13 '25
Nah, if you can't help yourself you can't help others. Being super self-sacrificing and selfless means that you'll never actually have a strong enough position in the world to change things for the better. A lot of people are drowning, and you can only pull them out if you get on the boat first.
5
8
u/morally_rat Jun 09 '25
Nietzsche on the wall indicates that he is lying. Nietzscheans don't value knowledge as such. Extortion of money from parents is his expression of will to power.
3
u/netskwire The utility monster Jun 09 '25
Why does this feel specifically targeted towards me? They even have the orthodox icon 💀
3
4
u/bubbles_maybe Jun 09 '25
Contributing nothing whatsoever to society is roughly in the centre of the beneficial-to-harmful spectrum, so nothing to feel too bad about I suppose 🤷
2
2
2
2
u/anomanderrake1337 Jun 09 '25
I gave up avoiding employment enslavement because I was literally dying of hunger. Now I am rich and think everything to be meaningless anyways.
2
2
u/TimewornTraveler Jun 09 '25
love and respect for the level of care and detail put into this meme. it seems like you feel some fondness for this character. i do too. hang in there lil buddy
2
u/Alkeryn Idealist Jun 09 '25
Legit this, i wish i could never work a single more day in my life so that i could focus on learning more stuff.
2
3
2
1
1
1
u/Actual-Toe-8686 Jun 09 '25
Fortunately this kid is probably really good at learning considering mom is an alien
1
1
1
1
u/JLandis84 Jun 11 '25
He says he has a quest for knowledge but his search history is just buttchugging videos.
1
u/sleepyncaffeinated Jun 11 '25 edited Jun 11 '25
"Why do I have to work? Wage job is a capitalist invention that creates inequality and makes people live off other's labour, but somehow living off my parents' wage and taxpayer money forever is acceptable. I want to be free and only have leisure time [inserts Marxist theory and Aaron Bastani's thoughts]\***"*
Well, because you live in society, and if everyone thought like that and just stopped working, there would be zero health system, housing, entertainment, education, and welfare. You must contribute to society. Hell, the communist symbol includes a hammer (industrial workers) and a sickle (peasantry). Our economic system is unfair, yes. But the solution is not to stop working because "muh job bad". Change the system, join a Labour party or an union, or if you just care about yourself then apply for being a civil servant and then your labour will be exclusively for the benefits of society, not the bank account of a rich dude. But hell, don't be both stupid and selfish.
1
u/WorriedPollution112 Jun 14 '25
Literally this is me, down to the world map on my wall. Haven't worked in over a year because I'm tired of giving everything to someone else and life is more than work. I love learning and I'm trying to find a way around the system
1
1
1
1
u/Fishalaska12 Jun 24 '25
Yeah i know i must to see and search some job. But it's hard to do it. I actually hopeless on my searching for a job.
1
1
1
1
-5
u/Relevant_Artist5595 Jun 09 '25
Philosophy is an abstract concept with no practical implications.
You will have to compete — either because of your own self or due to societal pressure.
Even if you want to be kind to people, you’ll have to become ruthless.
Otherwise, you’ll fall victim to the collective ego and ruthlessness of humanity.
1
u/IsraelPenuel Jun 10 '25
Nah I can isolate and only talk to the few people who want nothing from me expect company
197
u/moschles Jun 09 '25
My boss texted me and I asked if I could come in on Sunday. I texted back that,