# When to a philosphy meetup, and hated it?



## peanut77 (Jan 6, 2014)

*Went to a philosphy meetup, and hated it?*

Just out of curiosity, I decided to join a philosophy group on meetup.com and go to one of their 'talks' and events. This particular talk was based on morality and where it originated from, etc. 

Being an NT, I was surprised to realize that it really wasn't my thing. It all seemed incredibly pretentious and goalless. Just a bunch of people with too much free time on their hands getting heated about a topic on which a conclusion could never definitively be reached on, because it was all so subjective and based on individual perception anyway?

I don't mind philosophy in general but it was the whole concept of a bunch of people getting together and deliberately having discussions on it. It seemed a bit lame. 

This topic doesn't really have any purpose other than being a thought fart but I welcome your comments.


----------



## Huginn (Apr 12, 2014)

I have never gone to one because I assumed that it would be the way you describe. A lot of people that just like to hear themselves talk and who want to win arguments rather than seek truth or reach a consensus of some kind. 

I love philosophy but I don't enjoy discussing it with people these days. They are too easily offended because their views are so tied to their egos.


----------



## peanut77 (Jan 6, 2014)

Huginn said:


> I have never gone to one because I assumed that it would be the way you describe. A lot of people that just like to hear themselves talk and who want to win arguments rather than seek truth or reach a consensus of some kind.
> 
> I love philosophy but I don't enjoy discussing it with people these days. They are too easily offended because their views are so tied to their egos.


This is true. There were many people who were so convinced by their own perspectives that it seemed sort of ironic that they bothered going to a philosophy meeting.


----------



## Huginn (Apr 12, 2014)

To expand on this, it would seem that this sort of behavior has made our parliament/congress obsolete. Public forums descend into shouting matches where they just try to shame or humiliate one another. I wonder what sorts of things can be done to reverse this trend. Any ideas? 

Maybe they could put more philosophy in the school curriculum.


----------



## Solrac026 (Mar 6, 2012)

It was the opposite for me. I was bored specifically because there was no debating. It was super redundant after 15 minutes, the main speaker was just repeating himself. Which meetup did you go to BTW? I went to one I Orange County and am never going to that meetup again.


----------



## Scelerat (Oct 21, 2012)

There is a reason why: 

Plato, Aristotle and Socrates could step into any discussion on civics/philosophy today and understand most of it. 

While: 
Leonardi Da Vinci wouldn't last 2 minutes in an engineering seminar. 
Adam Smith wouldn't last too long at an economics symposium. 
Michael Faraday would struggle with modern electromagnetic research. 
Newton would need years of schooling to be effective in modern physics, or even calculus. 
Freud and Jung would both struggle in psychology. 
Hippocrates would be breaking his own oath.


----------



## peanut77 (Jan 6, 2014)

Scelerat said:


> There is a reason why:
> 
> Plato, Aristotle and Socrates could step into any discussion on civics/philosophy today and understand most of it.
> 
> ...


I agree, but I don't really get your point.


----------



## peanut77 (Jan 6, 2014)

Huginn said:


> To expand on this, it would seem that this sort of behavior has made our parliament/congress obsolete. Public forums descend into shouting matches where they just try to shame or humiliate one another. I wonder what sorts of things can be done to reverse this trend. Any ideas?
> 
> Maybe they could put more philosophy in the school curriculum.


A part of it is because we have this "jump into discussion" mentality which means people don't spend an adequate amount of time really processing the various viewpoints available and are somewhat forced to limit themselves to the particular perspective that they understand at that particular moment. 

There is no way you can make a well thought and balance contribution in the space of one hour whilst accounting for all viewpoints at the same time.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

peanut77 said:


> pretentious and goalless. Just a bunch of people with too much free time on their hands getting heated about a topic on which a conclusion could never definitively be reached on, because it was all so subjective and based on individual perception anyway?


Uh huh. 

Mental masturbation pritymuch.

I tried philosophy club in college. I very naively thought.. this'll be cool, right? Nah. It was the same, people trying to impress each other with overblown interpretations of shit, then one of them treated me like we were on a date. I said I'm out. One of them said that I just must be intimidated by their intellect. Rofl.. those egos man.. they can't even accept that someone simply might not be into listening to their mental masturbation.


----------



## peanut77 (Jan 6, 2014)

Solrac026 said:


> It was the opposite for me. I was bored specifically because there was no debating. It was super redundant after 15 minutes, the main speaker was just repeating himself. Which meetup did you go to BTW? I went to one I Orange County and am never going to that meetup again.


I went to the one in London


----------



## ScientiaOmnisEst (Oct 2, 2013)

peanut77 said:


> I agree, but I don't really get your point.


I think his point is that, unlike science, which accommodates a constantly growing, evolving, and synthesizing body of more-or-less objective knowledge, philosophy as a subject doesn't change much. It's mostly the same questions, the same issues, but with differing - and intensely subjective - interpretations, analyses, and "answers".


----------



## Killionaire (Oct 13, 2009)

I'd rather go to a meeting where people talk about ways to make more money or achieve
something else that's important, concrete, and practical. 
To me, philosophy is mostly an ancient and obsolete activity. It's something people did
back when there wasn't much known about the universe or anything else. 
Just a lot of speculation. You don't get very far with just speculation.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Lol no need for that. Those debates that get nowhere occur naturally in my mind.


----------



## HAL (May 10, 2014)

I assume _all_ meet-ups are like that.

'I like this particular thing. I better join a group who share this interest and meet up with them. So then... y'know... I'll feel validated.'


----------



## IDontThinkSo (Aug 24, 2011)

peanut77 said:


> A part of it is because we have this "jump into discussion" mentality which means people don't spend an adequate amount of time really processing the various viewpoints available and are somewhat forced to limit themselves to the particular perspective that they understand at that particular moment.
> 
> There is no way you can make a well thought and balance contribution in the space of one hour whilst accounting for all viewpoints at the same time.


This. Radio and TV crushed the creative debate.


----------



## noz (Dec 7, 2009)

Yes, I too joined a Philosophy Club when I attended uni, and I found the exact same experience. You want to read this thread:

http://personalitycafe.com/debate-f...history-repeats-itself-does-not-progress.html

After you are done reading that....

After you are done realizing the discipline of Philosophy is an endless vortex of the same, dry questions....

After you are done realizing that those that spend hours "discussing" such things merely want to "hear themselves talk" in order to find like-minds to play Patty-Cake with...

After you are done realizing Plato was right all along.....

Let me introduce you to the modern philosopher that knew it better than ANY of us, and actually had the articulation to properly state it all as such:

Richard Rorty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Philosophy is Dead, and the stake through its heart is covered in the blood of the American Pragmatist.

As an agent of Apollo, I don't like bearing messages of bad news, but Mother Sophia requires me to do so. 

Sorry.


----------



## Jetsune Lobos (Apr 23, 2012)

Someone somewhere once said that you shouldn't even bother with philosophy until you've actually gone and _experienced_ quite a few good things. I like it cause it means you don't have to dirty your hands with philosophy shenanigans for a few more years.


----------



## Huginn (Apr 12, 2014)

The realm of philosophy has been divided into many fields, it is not dead, it's just taking on a different form. It exists within science, law, politics, psychology, etc. People still theorize, reflect and contemplate things. There are also practical philosophies. Ways to live ones life.


----------



## Scelerat (Oct 21, 2012)

peanut77 said:


> I agree, but I don't really get your point.


The point is that the reason you find such seminars boring is because the fields are constructed in a way where no progress can really be made so everyone is discussing the same things over and over again.


----------



## peanut77 (Jan 6, 2014)

Scelerat said:


> The point is that the reason you find such seminars boring is because the fields are constructed in a way where no progress can really be made so everyone is discussing the same things over and over again.


Ahh ok. I thought you may have been arguing the reverse interpretation, where philosophy is considered so elemental and uniquely profound that it doesn't require understanding of modern concepts.


----------



## peanut77 (Jan 6, 2014)

HAL said:


> I assume _all_ meet-ups are like that.
> 
> 'I like this particular thing. I better join a group who share this interest and meet up with them. So then... y'know... I'll feel validated.'


Not necessarily. I don't think going to meetups has anything to do with 'validating'. If you want to invest more in a particular interest or hobby then obviously the most efficient way is to expose yourself to others with similar interest. 

Are you visiting personality cafe because you seek validation from fellow members? 

I found philosophy meetups to be particularly pointless though, because as said previously there's nothing concrete being discussed or concluded.


----------



## Scelerat (Oct 21, 2012)

peanut77 said:


> I found philosophy meetups to be particularly pointless though, because as said previously there's nothing concrete being discussed or concluded.


It depends a bit on the branch, things like mathematical philosophy is better than lets say ethics just like comparative politics is better than political philosophy. Though the latter in each case are more "fun" at times, plus much easier to bullshit your way around.


----------



## HAL (May 10, 2014)

peanut77 said:


> Not necessarily. I don't think going to meetups has anything to do with 'validating'. If you want to invest more in a particular interest or hobby then obviously the most efficient way is to expose yourself to others with similar interest.
> 
> Are you visiting personality cafe because you seek validation from fellow members?
> 
> I found philosophy meetups to be particularly pointless though, because as said previously there's nothing concrete being discussed or concluded.


I dunno, I'm kind of torn with it. Some group activities are good of course. However, for example, the physics society at my university is just for people who want to be part of a social circle and get drunk together, with friendships originally formed under the guise of 'we all like physics'. Which is fine, but it also annoys me greatly because I have no intention in joining them in their pally nights out and on their day trips to random places, yet I too enjoy the study of physics!

So yeah I guess it's partially a case of sour grapes for me. Most groups like that which I've witnessed all seem to just be people wanting to be friends with each other, rather than actually having any extra specially heightened interest in the thing the group is supposed to represent.


----------



## HAL (May 10, 2014)

Deleted. Double post.


----------



## peanut77 (Jan 6, 2014)

HAL said:


> I dunno, I'm kind of torn with it. Some group activities are good of course. However, for example, the physics society at my university is just for people who want to be part of a social circle and get drunk together, with friendships originally formed under the guise of 'we all like physics'. Which is fine, but it also annoys me greatly because I have no intention in joining them in their pally nights out and on their day trips to random places, yet I too enjoy the study of physics!
> 
> So yeah I guess it's partially a case of sour grapes for me. Most groups like that which I've witnessed all seem to just be people wanting to be friends with each other, rather than actually having any extra specially heightened interest in the thing the group is supposed to represent.


Yeah I somewhat agree with you. Joined a photography society at university, and pretty much all the events consisted of bar crawls and nights out with little photography in between. Not all meetups are like that though fortunately.


----------



## Elistra (Apr 6, 2013)

I enjoy philosophy, provided it is useful or relevant to the real world in some way. When it isn't, I get bored fast. 

Tbh, I think the reason why all that kind of "Prove you exist." nonsense was tolerated (sometimes even encouraged) in enlightenment-era royal courts was pragmatism on the part of the king. That is, a lower ranking nobleman who wasn't busy engaging in pointless word-shoving games would have been more apt to concentrate his mental energies on something more practical, like deposing the king and taking over the country. A court of overdressed fops who are obsessed with pointless ego masturbation ceases to be a meaningful threat to those who are _actually_ in charge.

And amusingly enough, most of the self-proclaimed "intelligentsia" STILL falls for that trap, and even when it's a modern republic, not a monarchy.


----------



## Scelerat (Oct 21, 2012)

Elistra said:


> I enjoy philosophy, provided it is useful or relevant to the real world in some way. When it isn't, I get bored fast.
> 
> Tbh, I think the reason why all that kind of "Prove you exist." nonsense was tolerated (sometimes even encouraged) in enlightenment-era royal courts was pragmatism on the part of the king. That is, a lower ranking nobleman who wasn't busy engaging in pointless word-shoving games would have been more apt to concentrate his mental energies on something more practical, like deposing the king and taking over the country. A court of overdressed fops who are obsessed with pointless ego masturbation ceases to be a meaningful threat to those who are _actually_ in charge.
> 
> And amusingly enough, most of the self-proclaimed "intelligentsia" STILL falls for that trap, and even when it's a modern republic, not a monarchy.


I suppose there is a reason why Machiavelli got a somewhat dodgy reputation early one while someone like Hobbes was lauded by kings. Then again, most of the philosophy books I own tend to be about government, power structures and the likes. I do allow some Hegel and Nietzsche etc just for fun, but that's more to challenge my own mind than for pragmatic reasons. 

Then again, for the so-called "intelligentsia" it's much easier to feel good about yourself when you're doing literary criticism than when you're doing something that can be objectively tested if it works or not. There is a reason why "communist" leanings are popular among academia but not among people who have more real world experience. 

Shit, if I was paid regardless of working or not, I'd spend all my time either drinking or figuring out how to get more drinking done.


----------



## MissAverage (Aug 7, 2014)

LOL yeah a philosophy meetup would leave me with the same feeling. Most likely the room was full of NFs. Nothing wrong with that but I think what makes ideas exciting is the when those ideas have an *application* in the real world.


----------



## uncertain (May 26, 2012)

Scelerat said:


> There is a reason why:
> 
> Plato, Aristotle and Socrates could step into any discussion on civics/philosophy today and understand most of it.
> 
> ...


_Beyond Freedom and Dignity_


----------

