My Philosophy of Life
Over the past few years, I have formulated my philosophy of life, a 14-page document that may be found at:
http://philosofer123.wordpress.com
In the first five pages of the document, I present and defend a number of philosophical positions, starting with atheism and culminating with negative hedonism (roughly, the view that peace of mind should be one's primary goal). The remainder of the document is devoted primarily to ways to achieve and maintain peace of mind.
I am sharing my philosophy in order to solicit feedback so that it may be improved. I look forward to a constructive discussion.
http://philosofer123.wordpress.com
In the first five pages of the document, I present and defend a number of philosophical positions, starting with atheism and culminating with negative hedonism (roughly, the view that peace of mind should be one's primary goal). The remainder of the document is devoted primarily to ways to achieve and maintain peace of mind.
I am sharing my philosophy in order to solicit feedback so that it may be improved. I look forward to a constructive discussion.
Comments (18)
Pierre: Thank you for the suggestion, but I would rather leave it open to the reader to discuss any part or parts of the document they wish. Also, as you note, the different parts of the document are integrated into a coherent whole.
Supposing World War III begins while you are reading this. Nuclear warfare leaves the world without electricity or electric machinery. Very bad. Now, more than before, you are interested in developing a philosophy of life, but writing just got more difficult. You don't have a typewriter, you don't have much paper at all (just a a few sheets and some scraps) and a couple of pencils. You might have to write your philosophy out on sand, wood, or stone.
What is the shortest -- and most compelling -- way for you to describe your philosophy of life?
Don't worry; be happy.
Which is why the document contains abundant advice on how to not worry and be happy.
If the problem is neurobiological, then medication may be needed.
If the regress argument for ultimate responsibility impossibilism is sound, then I cannot be ultimately responsible for creating the document.
But what then would the value be in discussing it with you? Are you not accepting responsibility for your views, or just not accepting 'ultimate' responsibility?
So that I may improve the document. Making improvements does not imply any sort of responsibility.
There is no value for me, though, in that, since to me, if you disclaim responsibility for your own writings, they are inauthentic. The least it's reasonable to expect is an existential commitment on your part to your side of a debate.