u/peacefuldays123

Modern science loves to tell us that Aristotle’s four causes were good but naive, and that we’ve finally “upgraded” to a clean mechanistic Darwinian worldview.

Except...

Whenever biologists describe the heart, they still explain it by what it does and what it’s for: pumping blood, sustaining the organism, allowing survival. Same with eyes: they’re for seeing, not just for “being there.”

Aristotle already had those four kinds of explanation. The material cause is what something is made of. The formal cause is its structure and organization. The efficient cause is the mechanical processes that make it work. The final cause is what it’s for, its telos, its function in the whole organism.

Darwinian biology borrows almost the entire package: material structure, functional form, efficient mechanisms, and historical selection. Then it suddenly gets squeamish at the word “purpose.” So instead of saying “eyes exist in order to see,” they rephrase it as “eyes exist because they enhanced fitness.”

Whoa. Very rigorous.

But now watch the sleight of hand: once selection is in place, they declare teleology “obsolete” and “unscientific,” as if talking about a trait being for something were suddenly a crime against physics.

Spoiler: it isn’t.

What actually happened is that the metaphysical version of final cause, Aristotle’s cosmic built‑in essences, got weakened into a historical one: traits are “for” whatever effects they were selected for. Call it teleonomy, call it function, call it “shorthand.” But it’s still teleology dressed in a lab coat.

And here’s where it gets fun:

The same reductionists who say “free will is an illusion because the brain is just machinery” will happily say that the brain is for goal‑directed behavior, decision‑making, and keeping the organism alive.

You can’t have it both ways: either talk about “what organisms are for” is legitimate, and teleology is alive and well in biology, or you admit that your rejection of final cause is really a linguistic purge, not a discovery about the world.

So it’s time to bring back your favorite scientist’s boogeyman into the conversation. The man that bridged philosophy with science. The father of biology. The one that makes materialists and reductionists cope. The one called Aristotle.

I’m tired of seeing that nincompoop Darwin get all the credit for the work he basically plagiarized by looking over Aristotle’s shoulder. Evolution this, evolution that, survival, fitness, randomness, boooriing. It’s just Aristotle with a lab coat and a PR team.

Any mention of purpose, design, or goal‑directedness gets thrown out the lab window out of fear that maybe, just maybe, things aren’t as lifeless and mechanistic as you want them to be. At that point, you might as well join the nihilists and existentialist pity party. Don’t forget your eyeliner and black clothing.

Next time someone here says “biology is purely mechanistic and therefore free will is impossible,” ask them:

“If the brain is just a machine, why does it do anything at all? And why does biology keep talking about functions, purposes, and ends?”

Maybe the real problem isn’t teleology. Maybe it’s the refusal to admit that purpose‑talk is baked into the way we even describe life.

Teleology: banned in philosophy, smuggled in through the back door of biology.

But I know most of you aren’t ready for that type of discussion 😎

Kierkegaard claims objective reasoning can't resolve the most important human questions (faith, purpose), so truth in those domains is 'lived with infinite passion', not proven to others.

In other words, truth is an inward process. Subjective.

Here's my problem with this dangerous view:

If truth becomes “inward,” what stops it from collapsing into arbitrariness?

Why call it “truth” at all instead of commitment or preference?

Does the “leap of faith” legitimize contradictory beliefs equally?

I’m asking because I think some existentialist ideas can be psychologically risky if they’re taken too far, and I want to see how defenders of Kierkegaard handle these problems. If you think I’m missing something, show me where I'm wrong.

Existentialism is just depression and confusion masquerading as philosophy for edgy, confused teenagers. No adult with a serious mind would read through it and not laugh at the absurd ideas their thinkers conjure in their cauldron of confusion. Let’s go through some of these sticky and slimy ideas, shall we?

Kierkegaard. This guy thinks “truth is subjective.” Haha, seriously? Bro saw that 1 + 1 = 2 and said, “Nope, that’s false.” If truth is subjective, there’s no objective common ground to share. If there’s no common ground, all that’s left is disagreement. But if you actually agree with someone, subjectivity starts to fade. It’s a self‑defeating argument dressed up as profundity.

Camus. He equates human life with a guy rolling a beach‑ball‑sized stone up a hill and rolling it back down every day as punishment. Haha, all you have to do is the dishes; it’s not that serious. Our friend here has enough time to loaf around with a cigarette and write his “poor‑me” stories, but somehow life is too much to handle. Try working on a roof, then come complain.

Beauvoir. Oh man, don’t even get me started. Same cargo, different packaging: swap the gender, sprinkle on some woke seasoning. She sees the pile of dishes and says, “Nope, this is oppression,” while her male neighbor is digging in the mines from sunrise to sundown. Nuff said.

Heidegger. This dude is a wannabe Stoic with doomer vibes. “You’re gonna die, bro” is his slogan. Repeat it before every decision and you’re spiritually settled. Stay away from this guy, especially if you have OCD or ADHD. He’s basically the self‑help book your therapist warned you about.

Sartre. This loon thinks everything that happens to you is because of your own choices. Let’s say, for whatever reason, someone steals something from you. Your fault. The neighbor’s dog shits on your yard. Your fault. WWIII starts in your country. Your fault. Apparently you control reality. If you have any kind of anxiety disorder, stay away. You’ve been warned.

To sum it up, existentialism is just a phase. It’s a phase that’s bad for your mental health. But like all phases, it ends. And you know what the good news is? You can skip this phase entirely. Now that is real freedom.

Existentialism is just depression and confusion masquerading as philosophy for edgy, confused teenagers. No adult with a serious mind would read through it and not laugh at the absurd ideas their thinkers conjure in their cauldron of confusion. Let’s go through some of these sticky and slimy ideas, shall we?

Kierkegaard. This guy thinks “truth is subjective.” Haha, seriously? Bro saw that 1 + 1 = 2 and said, “Nope, that’s false.” If truth is subjective, there’s no objective common ground to share. If there’s no common ground, all that’s left is disagreement. But if you actually agree with someone, subjectivity starts to fade. It’s a self‑defeating argument dressed up as profundity.

Camus. He equates human life with a guy rolling a beach‑ball‑sized stone up a hill and rolling it back down every day as punishment. Haha, all you have to do is the dishes; it’s not that serious. Our friend here has enough time to loaf around with a cigarette and write his “poor‑me” stories, but somehow life is too much to handle. Try working on a roof, then come complain.

Beauvoir. Oh man, don’t even get me started. Same cargo, different packaging: swap the gender, sprinkle on some woke seasoning. She sees the pile of dishes and says, “Nope, this is oppression,” while her male neighbor is digging in the mines from sunrise to sundown. Nuff said.

Heidegger. This dude is a wannabe Stoic with doomer vibes. “You’re gonna die, bro” is his slogan. Repeat it before every decision and you’re spiritually settled. Stay away from this guy, especially if you have OCD or ADHD; he’s basically the self‑help book your therapist warned you about.

Sartre. This loon thinks everything that happens to you is because of your own choices. Let’s say, for whatever reason, someone steals something from you. Your fault. The neighbor’s dog shits on your yard. Your fault. WWIII starts in your country. Your fault. Apparently you control reality. If you have any kind of anxiety disorder, stay away. You’ve been warned.

To sum it up, existentialism is just a phase. It’s a phase that’s bad for your mental health. But like all phases, it ends. And you know what the good news is? You can skip this phase entirely. Now that is real freedom.

Nihilism is just depression disguised as intellectual shallowness pretending to be deep. The frontman is a German try-hard with a huge unkempt moustache with an even bigger ego. "God is dead" he groans in arrogance while he struggles to get out of bed. Did I say front man? Now that I think about it, he's the only member of the boy band. The others are so irrelevant I don't remember who they are.

"Everything is meaningless, bro" nihilists mutter as they look in envy at others with meaningful lives and smiles on their faces. "Do as you please" they wince as they regret the choices they make every day.

Stop pretending you're being deep, you're not. It's cringe behavior disguised as faux-intellectuality. Your brains touched the soap, and the result was brainwash. And what a brainwash it was. If you want to keep washing it, at least pick a different soap with better ingredients. The suds are visible from a mile away.

Prove me wrong or admit the seethe. Poll below.

Poll: Nihilism's core flaw? A) Nietzsche's 'stache/ego B) Hidden depression/envy C) Cringe soap suds D) All of it.