Since I was about 8 I’ve had existentialism’s , constantly and the only way to deal with it was to not deal with it, to ignore it. I’ve never fully fit in I have friends but I never truly adapted to regularities like your race truly who I am and when I saw others do it I cringed it felt weird to me because when I think of it truly it feels like it matters so little I see Mexican people listening to Spanish songs and wearing sombreros and I can’t help but look away. It feels so weird that people care about who or what they are besides curiosity it matters so little and people genuinely care about their colors/melatonin and where their ancestors lived. Not only race and culture that confuses me but something that hurts me is the random remembrance of the fact that after death absolutely anything could happen and you can’t just say something like “it’s after death you can’t do anything about it just live your life” but how do I know that I can’t do anything about it what if a religion is right and I’m making the wrong choice what if I get tortured for all of eternity and that that matters the most no matter what happens on earth that is the ultimate trump to anything on earth is the fact you could be tortured for eternity even if it isn’t part of a religion.

Since we have a name for the word "nothing" does that give it existence on some platform? Is acknowledgement enough to give it existence? If so, will nothing never be nothing?

I've spent some time learning modern philosophy and trying to solve metaphysics in some way. Recently, I've been discussing the existence of God (I'm an atheist) with my Reddit friend and was involved in a kind of brainstorm state. So it has changed my view on skepticism and the art of making words from thoughts. As the essence of this change, I came up with some aphorisms (as I see them). They are much inspired by the style of Nietzsche's thinking and writing. I'd like you guys to critique and rate them one by one if you find them interesting. It'll help me a lot

Also, I must mention that I'm a Russian speaker, so there may be some mistakes in translation which will probably lead to "missounding" and losing some of the effect.

Life begins when every echo of a thought is followed by an exclamation mark!

Aphorisms that exclaim, affirm, lash. And at last, aphorisms that overflow — overflowing from souls full to the brim, brimming over with life.

1. A deity is, in truth, a convenient device for describing reality — mythical in origin. At their leisure, people sought to fulfill their drive toward rationalization through an existing cultural phenomenon: God. Now God is dead. The shadows, too, shall die!
2. I am convinced that metaphysical positions should be evaluated solely from the standpoint of their historical and cultural presuppositions and consequences. Then the day after tomorrow shall dawn!
3. Intuitionism is a pitiful attempt to pass off personal conviction as certainty. And yet it is precisely such confident thoughts that pave the graveyard of human knowledge. Make way for the hesitant!
4. I prefer Hume as a weapon of skepticism against the "rational" that passes itself off as universal!
5. The active part of humanity must create value out of itself, must be the source of the inner value of knowledge and will — even though the "active part" is simply the evolutionarily effective part, and the values being created are simply a rhetorical device for thinking!
6. Your convictions correspond to reality? — preferably. Reality corresponds to your convictions? — not necessarily!
7. I have noticed that Nietzscheans are mostly mere bearers of Nietzsche's thought — not even incubators. His thought does not come to life within them; rather, it degenerates, finding its final refuge. They are philosophers, but not objects of philosophy. Nietzsche struck philosophy with the lightning of an exclamation mark; they merely reread, illumined by the dim glow of nightlights!

So that's it. Most of them are rather raw, but I want you to pay some extra attention to 3 and 8. You must remember that they were born from a discussion and are not exactly poetic. Thank you for your time and maybe thoughts!

I’m only 17 and life is genuinely so boring like i’m not suicidal. But i wake up not feeling happy or anything because the day is just going to be boring i only really go gym and i don’t even like the gym that much but u have nothing better to do. it’s not like im inside all day as well

I go to parties been drunk before didn’t like the feeling at all haven’t been high yet but i will try

So someone tell me what’s the actual point in living and how can i be more happy

How do you reconcile the fundamental truth of being free no matter what our circumstances are with the tragedy of our lives, where we are forced to sell our most valuable resources, time and energy, for peanuts?

Wrote this down after a hard workout, thought of the idea in the middle of it. Also pulled from Albert Camus with the Sisyphus reference. Feel free to discuss:

What’s the point in living if I’m not dying one day at a time? It’s not really life if I don’t come face to face with what feels like death. Now I’m not saying be reckless with your precious life, which you only get one chance at; I’m saying make it all count. Find your limits. Then go past them. Honestly, what is living but your life rapidly speeding toward inevitable death? That’s a pretty bleak reality, but it’s still our reality. If I’m not dying everyday then my life isn’t being lived to the absolute maximum. Whatever I choose, I’m still slowly dying everyday. Now, I have the choice to spend my life scrolling my phone on the couch or out on a run in the 90 degree heat. Either way I’m still living my life, and in reality dying, every minute closer to real death. One must imagine Sisyphus happy. I am Sisyphus, but you need not imagine my joy — the grind, these small deaths that I die every day — they make me all the more alive. I appreciate fullness of life even more, and these sacrifices make me complete. I know the end, which is death, but I choose life through dying continually, so that I will never be with those timid souls too weak to test themselves or spend their allotted time on this earth in a way unfitting their true potential as a living human being. I have seen and felt and tasted defeat, and am stronger for it — have lived in more fullness of joy because of it. And in the end, I will rest, knowing that I made my death worth it by crowning it with my life.

Humans often shape their identities around core attributes such as ambition, love, resilience amongst a multitude of others. Yet, a deeper analysis of individual behaviours and the forces that drive them point to a singularity, an omnipresent energy that controls these impulses in which we act. Perhaps, this underlying presence is unconscious in a sense, but developing a greater understanding and grappling with self-awareness can enable personal identification. This essay explores whether this energy, fear, should be considered as the fundamental, and possibly the most important emotion by examining morality, identity, and human resolve. 

Whilst fear is only one “true” emotion out of an infinite assortment processed by people, I believe it displays a multifaceted nature in actually shaping these qualities that humans frequently pride themselves on. Fear may be the most influential property because it underlies, often without recognition, behaviour, feelings and values which may appear unrelated to fear entirely.

So why do we even feel fear in the first place? Fear is an ancient evolutionary mechanism that precedes modern humanity and was essential for pure survival in early human history. Fear is processed through the brain in a neural pathway starting at the thalamus. Once there is a threat detected, the thalamus fires signals to the amygdala which processes them and allows the release of stress hormones such as adrenaline and cortisol. Ancestors with a greater “fight-or-flight” response typically survived longer than those without it, as they were able to perceive a threat before it was too late. In contemporary society, the average human being is not in a constant battle to survive day-by-day, hence fear itself has evolved into a different mechanism entirely. Whilst it still possesses the ability to produce “fight-or-flight” responses, this emotion has developed into an unseen backbone for everyday behaviour and values. 

If fear originated from the need to survive, it is reasonable to ask whether it extends beyond these specific situations. As previously stated, modern individuals rarely fear predators on a regular schedule, yet fear is still as prominent as ever. As humans have evolved, fear has also progressed past its unidimensional qualities and has embedded itself as a necessary evil within our psychology. Fear manifests into actions, thoughts and characteristics that define conscious life, often grounding itself through behaviours that seem unrelated to fear entirely. For example, humans usually measure success in the form of accolades or achievements. Usually, this is seen as a positive experience, however an individual may be suffering from fear of failure, neglect or insignificance which actually drives their motivation for success. In addition, the pursuit of major wealth is similarly entrenched in the fear of poverty and instability, providing a sugarcoated barrier to the tightening grip of reality. In both, and many other cases, if this fear becomes “conquered” by materialistic veils, increasing attachment to these mere “things” may create an environment for pride and greed to emerge. Although fear is uncomfortable, it is necessary. Fear appears to be the most driving force behind human values and behaviours, meaning it cannot be ignored, only managed by embracing one’s identity.

It is now established that fear can be used as a vehicle for success, but it possesses a duality. If someone’s fear is not recognised as a part of their character, and is rather ignored, detrimental effects may deteriorate one’s morality. By diving into the deadliest sin, pride, we can confront the possibility that fear, or the attempt to escape it, is the sole reason an individual embodies this. Unrestrained confidence functions as a defence against fear as an endeavour to escape it by becoming the opposite. An individual with a strong, outgoing personality and an invulnerable self-image could be grappling with the fear of inadequacy or rejection.

The person that looks truly fearless is perhaps, among the most fearful.

To further examine the insidious effects of underlying fear, we must address a consistent, universal, conscious conduct of manipulation. If fear has the capacity to linger without recognition in our everyday behaviours, what role does it play in actually being truthful to ourselves? A fascinating concept is that people rarely lie “just for the sake” of lying, there is almost always a deeper reason behind action. A lie serves as a fabricated veil against honest consequences. Lying is ingrained in the human psyche from early childhood; for example, a child lies after breaking something as protection from angering the owner. As one progresses through life, the art of lying becomes a part of their person. Most would have heard of the phrase, “living a lie,” however many don’t realise the truth encompassed by the statement and the universality of it. The acts of exaggeration, fake diplomacy, or manipulation all provide temporary security against the vice of our true fears, all accumulating to a point where individuals become fragments of themselves in living their lies.

If fear holds the potential to become the driving force behind almost all core human values such as pride, ambition and even honesty, perhaps its most destructive trait is not the feeling itself, but the act of ignoring its influence, whether blissfully or intentionally. We have established that fear operates beneath conscious thought and manifests into ideals and behaviours that seem completely unrelated to its weight. But if fear has the ability to disrupt one’s true values, or even reach the extent that an individual is consciously devoting time to “living a lie,” how can someone truly find themselves without first confronting their greatest fears? 

Whilst no human being may have the capacity to reach enlightenment, a continuous journey to self-awareness is much more realistic and healthy in finding identity. Self-awareness is steeped in honesty, which as discussed earlier, cannot be reached without challenging fear itself. A majority of individuals often spend their lives silently battling with the products of fear, but don’t reach beneath the surface to face the fear itself. In a sense, these people cannot find themselves without encountering the unconscious, and frankly uncomfortable barriers that lie in their hearts of darkness. Recognition however, does not eliminate fear at all. Fear is omnipresent. But having the capacity as a human to become aware and understand the effect that fear has on your values, opinions, and mental state transforms the slanted power dynamic from master to embraced companion. If accepted, even unwillingly, fear will no longer be the commander pulling the strings, but will instead act as an honest reason behind the uncomfortable feelings one encounters. This conscious reality allows the individual to regain their autonomy through evaluating whether their fear has the authority to control their actions.
To keep escalating up the hierarchy of human principles, I pose to you the question: if fear holds such a clutch over human values and behaviours, does it also have the power to shape our morality? Many moral virtues may emerge from fear, suggesting that it can stand as one of the central pillars in the colosseum of the individual ethics system. Most people like to think that they act morally because: they are good people, they value justice, and that they don’t expect external praise for their actions. If we look deeper into these “virtues,” we start to question whether humans are truly virtuous, or if they act in a selfless facade? By diving into the core ideals behind morality, a recurring theme seems to appear as motivation to value these cornerstones, vulnerability. If we take justice as an example, humans care profoundly about maintaining moral integrity that it even becomes a demand. The demand for justice. But why? This “need” could have possibly originated from the fear that unchecked suffering for others may potentially become one’s own in the near future. This can be seen as altruistic, although when searching beyond face value, it points to a more psychologically complex and selfish conclusion. 

If fear enables the concept of morality, are moral behaviours genuinely moral?

Let’s look at a theoretical case study: One person does not cheat on their partner because they’re scared of getting caught and facing the consequences. However, another person does not cheat on their partner because they believe infidelity is wrong. The latter scenario would be almost objectively considered “more moral.” This analogy can be easily applied to many moral crossroads, allowing us to tackle a vulnerable ultimatum of human spirit: can we transcend selfishness by understanding our central fears to ultimately become truly moral? Hence, fear shows us that it can initiate morality, but it cannot fully explain the reasoning responsible for our authentic feelings. That requires a further assessment of individual character.

What if we looked into the contrary, a life without fear? Most individuals have a seemingly subconscious goal to conquer their fears and eventually live a life of “freedom.” When someone is incapable of fearing, there cannot be insecurity, anxiety or suffering under the potential consequences of each decision. It simply does not matter. I would like to introduce a hypothetical scenario: If a person is knowingly immortal, what do they value, and even further, what is their point of living? As mortal humans, life is our most valued asset because it has an inevitable end. Would an everlasting being possess a burning anxiety over the possible loss of a relationship? Would they cherish the mundane moments of life the same as a normal person? Because once every outcome of existence has occurred an infinite amount of times, complacency is inescapable. Hence, a person without fear is not necessarily courageous, as courage requires fear to have meaning. They become ignorant. Detached. Reality is disconnected from their psychological standpoint because fear enables emotional recognition of consequences. Without fear, actions lose meaning. The central concern is that humans do not fear everything equally, they fear based on how much they value an asset of their life. This is evidence that fear works as a shadow cast by value. It is not merely a response, but a catalyst that gives life significance by working in tandem with value and loss.

As a final conclusion, we must remember that fear originated as an ancient mechanism for survival. Whilst it still serves this purpose, it must be recognised that its evolution as an underlying force beneath the human resolve is truly profound. We have discussed that fear shapes ambition, pride, honesty, identity and even the things we assign different levels of value to. But perhaps these are merely below the grandeur. Perhaps, our greatest fear is not even a concrete threat, it is the possibility that the act of existing is quite frankly nihilistic. The lifelong endeavour for unattainable meaning could conceivably be the true plight of human conscience itself. The fear of meaninglessness potentially sits at the original singularity beneath all tangible thoughts, values and actions, silently driving our search for connection and achievement. In a disturbingly ironic sense, evidence that meaning matters may directly arise from this fundamental fear.

So what to do with this information? Embrace it. If fear is so deeply woven into the human psyche, a pursuit of life without fear might be a misguided goal to start with. Fear cannot be conquered in any permanent sense because it lingers beneath all individual thought, value, and liminal mental space between acting or not. Thus fear is not some tyrant to dethrone, or something to be hidden away, because if people do not accept all aspects of their character, they are not truly themselves. The goal is to shift the power dynamic from a master to an acquaintance, one that can teach us what we value the most by becoming self-aware to it. Ultimately, if our deepest, most hidden fears are understood and embraced by being uncomfortably vulnerable and honest with ourselves, realistic freedom becomes accessible. Instead of choosing to run from our fears, genuine autonomy can be regained in allowing us to decide whether a situation deserves our fear, as opposed to being controlled by it. 

Therefore, through walking hand-in-hand with fear itself, true freedom is found.

P.s. I am only 19 and this is my first project written out of pure self-interest. My concepts are certainly not concrete as I am still maturing in my philosophical journey. Open to discussions :)

Ive been thinking about this a lot lately whether meaning is something we discover or something we desperately invent because the alternative that nothing matters is too uncomfortable to sit with

Nihilism says theres no meaning Existentialism says create your own But does a meaning you manufactured yourself actually count

Can you imagine being in a state of nothingness forever? Because some believe that is what happens once we die. I truly cannot believe that one day my body will be lifeless and my consciousness will just be gone. Hmmm but does it really go away? If the Law of Conservation of Energy is true, that energy cannot be created and destroyed, only transformed or transferred, then that must mean everything in the universe has existed ever since and will remain so as long as “eternity” may go on. Does that also mean we may leave a fabric of our existence from the energy we use? If our consciousness runs on energy, do we lose it once we die? Or maybe because consciousness is not a form of energy so that must mean it’s a separate concept; probably souls? So many questions yet only one possible explanation may answer them all. A great conundrum I often linger on to fall asleep. Lol I know I may not look like the kind of person to think about existential dilemmas, but I can’t help it.

From everything I've seen, the arguments in favor of determinism are strong. I've also looked at some arguments for free will, but they don't seem nearly as compelling in comparison. Given that, this entire causal process has led me to conclude that this ontological logic is practically powerless. I was determined to read Sartre, Dostoevsky and Camus, and consequently I was determined to develop greater sympathy for the phenomenal world. Because of that, I can exist with this core way of thinking. Since I was led to become who I am, I can still assume complete responsibility for my choices. it's an authentic mode of being.

I couldn't help but find this narrative of human responsibility aesthetically superior. And from that point onward, I can push my future toward what is, in any case, the only possible reality. Intellectually, I anticipate that this reality consists in a commitment to responsibility. Was that commitment itself already determined? One could certainly say so. Either way, that reality only came to fruition through this entire process of reflection and accumulated experience.

So if we're going to live, it's better to embrace the role we have—or at least the one we believe to be ours. To live authentically. For me, existentialism is phenomenologically true. The fact that I live it today is the only reality available to me. I was determined to arrive here.

And even if I can't say that I am condemned to be free, I can say that I am condemned to move forward into this single, unknown future and experience that freedom without ever having the script in my hands.

I’m looking for philosophical questions or abstract topics to write about.

Not topics like “What did Socrates believe?” or “Explain existentialism.”

I’m more interested in original questions that make you stop and think, things about identity, consciousness, time, morality, memory, perception, meaning, language, reality, emotions, or human nature.

The more introspective or reflective, the better. I’d especially love questions that don’t have a clear right or wrong answer and could be explored from multiple perspectives.

What’s the most interesting philosophical question you’ve ever come across?

Die Belanglosigkeit des Lebens als Selbstzweck

Ein persönlicher existenzialistischer Ansatz
Einleitung
Was passiert, wenn man die Gleichgültigkeit des Universums wirklich ernst nimmt? Wenn man nicht versucht, sie wegzuerklären, sondern sie konsequent zu Ende denkt? Dieser Text beschreibt meinen eigenen Denkweg – von der Physik bis hin zu einer praktischen Lebenshaltung.
Entstehungsweg
Mit 16 Jahren hörte ich den Podcast „Raum und Zeit“ und bekam einen tiefen Eindruck von der immensen Größe und Gleichgültigkeit des Kosmos. Die Frage lag nahe: Welchen Nutzen hat Leben eigentlich im großen Ganzen?
Ich erkannte schnell, dass Leben keinen kosmischen Nutzen hat. Es ist kein fundamentales Element wie Schwerkraft oder Zeit, sondern lediglich ein lokaler, häufiger Zustand von Materie und Energie. Eine kurze Hoffnung, dass intelligentes Leben durch Technologie doch noch kosmische Relevanz erlangen könnte, zerbrach an den harten physikalischen Grenzen (Lichtgeschwindigkeit, Entfernungen, Energie).
Die zentralen Erkenntnisse
Leben ist grundsätzlich ein Selbstzweck. Daraus ergibt sich die Frage: Worauf richten sich dann unsere Gedanken und unser Handeln? Ich ordne sie drei großen Pfeilern zu:

1. Überleben und taktisches Planen – der pure biologische Selbstzweck.
2. Bedeutung schaffen und Vermächtnis hinterlassen – oft ein Versteck vor der eigenen Belanglosigkeit.
3. Streben nach realem Glück und Zufriedenheit im Moment – der ehrlichste und unmittelbar wirksamste Pfeiler.
   Dieser Ansatz steht in der Tradition des Existenzialismus, besonders nahe an Albert Camus’ Akzeptanz des Absurden und der daraus folgenden radikalen Freiheit, sein eigenes Leben bewusst zu gestalten.
   Auswirkungen auf das aktive Leben
   Die Akzeptanz dieser Belanglosigkeit wirkt befreiend. Der Druck, etwas „Großes“ oder Bleibendes schaffen zu müssen, löst sich auf. Säule 2 (Vermächtnis) wird nur noch als Mittel zum Zweck genutzt, nicht als Lebensziel. Stattdessen konzentriere ich mich bewusst auf Säule 3: Jeden Tag möglichst viel echte Befriedigung und Freude zu erleben, während ich Säule 1 nur ausreichend bediene.
   Zum Sinn des Lebens
   Die verzweifelte Suche nach einem höheren, vorgegebenen Sinn wird überflüssig. Es gibt keinen. Stattdessen entsteht die Freiheit, selbst einen persönlichen, im Moment erlebbaren Sinn zu schaffen – durch bewusste Maximierung von Glück und Zufriedenheit.
   Fazit
   Die Erkenntnis der kosmischen Bedeutungslosigkeit muss nicht in Resignation enden. Sie kann zu einer leichten, ehrlichen und freien Lebensweise führen. Leben ist ein Selbstzweck – und genau das gibt uns die Erlaubnis, es auf unsere eigene Weise gut zu leben.
   Zum Diskurs
   Ich bin sehr gespannt auf eure Gedanken. Erkennt ihr euch in den drei Säulen wieder? Wo seht ihr Stärken oder Schwächen dieses Ansatzes? Wie geht ihr selbst mit der Absurdität des Daseins um?
   Offener und respektvoller Austausch ist herzlich willkommen.

Simone de Beauvoir or a crazy woman exploiting her students. Stop praising people who don't deserve it.

Freedom in a Couple: Beauvoir encouraged Sartre's sexual relationships with other women (particularly with her own students). She sought out these young women herself, fostering their rapprochement with Sartre, and sometimes even had intimate relationships with them. The Rule of "Necessary" Relationships: The philosophers agreed that "necessary" (primary) relationships between them would always come first, while affairs on the side were considered "casual." Personal Experience: Simone de Beauvoir herself developed romantic relationships with other women, which often intersected with Sartre's life. One of the most famous scandals associated with this practice concerned Beauvoir's relationship.

Love triangles: Sartre was attracted to his young female students, and Beauvoir often had romantic or sexual relationships with some of these same girls (for example, Olga Kozakiewicz and Wanda Kozakiewicz)

No matter what we do, no matter how slowly we can make it happen, no matter how kind you are, no matter how mean you are, we’re all going to die

we’re all just going to die. This isn’t me being nihilistic, positive, negative. I just look around and I look at these people and I’m just like wow we’re all going to die.

The young people, the old people, everybody. We all have an expiration date, this planet has an expiration date, plastic has an expiration date, everything around us will all become one with Earth but when the Earth was no more and humanity is no more there will just be nothing.

The abuse, the music, the art, the love, the joy, the sadness, the hurt it will all disappear with our physical bodies and disappear with people, animals, plants.

When a person finally dies, the last thing that leaves them is heat, and that heat dissipates into the surrounding space. After the sun dies, the Earth will not be able to survive because we need the sun. And when that heat disappears, the Earth will just become dead. Like every other living being that existed.

Sartre's "existence precedes essence" implies that we are nothing other than the sum of our choices, and that even the continuity of the self is something we actively construct, not something given.