Should we judge people for having relationships with their first cousins? If we look at individual freedom, everyone has the right, and they can mate with whoever they want (with consent). But, I am more interested in understanding whether it is morally correct in today's time when there is enough population to mate with strangers? If it is morally incorrect, then why?
I believe Indian Philosophy is very interesting and deep, until you opt multidimensional approach. Other hand many want Science to endorse (or approve) Indian Philosophy. What is your call or point of view. Kindly comment in unbias manner.
Brothers and sisters , the greatest danger to a nation is not poverty, not hardship, not struggle — it is a population that has stopped believing it can change its future.
India is full of talent, intelligence, energy, and potential, yet millions remain trapped between corruption, division, blind distraction, and systems that no longer serve the people properly. The youth are told to consume endlessly, obey silently, and never question why society continues repeating the same failures generation after generation.
But history has never been changed by passive people. Every great transformation began when ordinary people decided they would no longer accept weakness, decay, and stagnation as normal.
A nation cannot rise when its people are divided against each other, when institutions lose discipline, and when culture becomes driven only by entertainment instead of purpose. We need organization. We need direction. We need people who are willing to dedicate themselves to rebuilding society instead of endlessly complaining about it.
This movement is not built on empty promises. It is built on discipline, unity, intelligence, and action. We believe India can become stronger, more organized, more educated, and more future-focused — but only if a new generation rises with the courage to challenge decay and build something greater.
No one is coming to save society for us. The responsibility belongs to those willing to stand up, think independently, and work relentlessly for reform.
If you believe India deserves a stronger future, then stop being a spectator to history. Become part of those who will shape it.
If u want to join a collective organization dm me
Modern rational inquiry has been extraordinarily successful in explaining the external world through logic, measurement and empirical observation. However, consciousness presents a unique philosophical problem because it is also directly experienced subjectively.
A scientific instrument can observe neural activity, behavior, and biological processes associated with conscious states. But the direct experience itself, what philosophers often call subjective awareness, remains internally accessible only to the conscious subject.
This creates an epistemological question:
Are third person methods alone sufficient to fullyy investigate consciousness or do first person methods such as meditation, introspection, and self observation also hold philosophical value?
Many contemplative traditions approached consciousness through direct inner inquiry rather than external analysis alone. Practices such as yoga, meditation and self observation were developed as methods for examining the structure of subjective experience itself. Philosophers and spiritual teachers like Osho, Sadhhguru etc. became influential partly because they treated consciousness as something to be explored experientially rather than merely theorized about intellectually.
At the same time, purely subjective approaches can also become vulnerable to illusion, bias and unverifiable conclusions.
So the philosophical tension seems to be this:
If external observation alone is incomplete for understanding subjective consciousness and pure subjectivity alone is unreliable, then what would a balanced framework for investigating consciousness actually look like?
Is hard work all it takes to succeed? I’ve often seen people say that effort is the only variable under our control and the only thing that differentiates winners from losers. For example, if you want to get a particular high-paying job or qualify for an exam, many believe that only hard work can lead you to success.
But I feel like hard work is just one variable among many others. Where you’re born, which family you’re born into, how much wealth your family has, your and your family members’ health, and mental faculties like reasoning, intelligence, memory, and emotional regulation all matter a lot. Sometimes, these can even overshadow hard work. However, whenever I express these opinions, people tell me that I’m just lazy because I believe that hard work isn’t always the answer. Because of this, I’ve stopped discussing it with others altogether.
What are your opinions on this? Is hard work the only thing that leads to success, or are there other factors too?
The quote points toward a deeply philosophical idea: many people may not actually fear boredom, but rather the discomfort of self-confrontation. Silence removes distraction. And without distraction, we are left alone with our thoughts, insecurities, regrets, identity, and unresolved emotions.
Think about modern life today:
music during travel, podcasts while walking, reels before sleep, notifications every few minutes, constant social validation, endless content consumption. Very few moments remain where people simply sit quietly with themselves.
Existential philosophers and spiritual traditions across the world have often argued that self-awareness begins in silence, but modern society increasingly treats silence as something uncomfortable that must immediately be filled.
Are people loosing interest or it is outdated. Especially in Indian Context.
You're standing in a circle at a party, and somebody is talking about how incredibly hard their year has been. And you watch as groups do what groups always do. There's the soft head tilts, the knowing noises, the hands on the arm, and the "Oh, you poor thing!"
But according to Nietzsche, this is one of the most quietly destructive things that humans actually do to each other. Nietzsche argued that pity is more destructive, and far worse even than cruelty.
Of course, pity doesn't physically harm a person, but it does something far stranger to the receiver. It gives them a costume. It gives them a label called 'the sufferer.' That I am the unlucky one, and I am the person that things happen to.
For Nietzsche, pity corrodes both the receiver and the giver. For the receiver, when they hear the "Oh, you poor thing," they are given a small and subtle instruction to keep being the poor thing. And that story then hardens into an identity.
And for the giver, while pity might feel like generosity, it is actually a way of standing above someone. The knowing noises and the soft looks are actually a way of saying, "Thank God I'm not like you." A culture saturated in pity is not a kind one. It is one that has learned to make people feel small, and to feel good about it.
The friend who is always the wounded one, the colleague who is always the victim. For Nietzsche, pity does not heal them. It keeps them where they are.
According to Nietzsche, pity asks the sufferer to stay the sufferer, but he thought that we should never be defined by the bad things that happened to us. He thought we should always move forward, and we should always define ourselves and move past the past.
Do you think there's a difference between empathy and the kind of pity Nietzsche is talking about?
A. Yes , (20 hours , Theory + practically) systematically
B. Heard but didn't learned
C. Didn't Heard, didn't learned
I have lately started seeing falseness and lies within and try to be as truthful as I can. I notice that our society runs on sweet lies.
For example:
How are you?
I am good.
This I am good is the biggest lie we meditate on everyday.
Yesterday, I had a conversation with my co-worker. She speaks a lot and has every sort of information about other co-workers. She kept talking for hours, one person after another. And my questions are mostly inwardly pointed. Whatever my question was, she would give a one liner and start her commentary again.
I asked her:
Do you notice what you are doing? You are talking about each and every person around us, but when I ask you about yourself, you run from that. Why are you running?
She replied:
I don't want to take stress amd anxiety and I want to be happy. So, i try to be happy.
Her chatterbox started again, and I asked, How do you have all this information about other co-workers?
She replied: It's not my fault. Everybody comes to me and tells me.
I objected: It's the structure of relationship you share with others. They never tell me all this, because I haven't based my relationship on that structure. I like deep conversations and that's how I structure relationships. I am not consciously doing that, it happens.
Why do we run from ourselves?
Is our truth so uncomfortable?
Will running ever solve that inner chaos?
How can we come at peace if we don't acknowledge the inner restlessness in the first place?
People love saying everyone has the same 24 hours, but reality clearly disagrees. A child born into wealth gets safety, education, confidence, networks, and opportunities before they even understand the world. Another child may spend their early years fighting poverty, instability, or survival itself.
That’s why the idea of the ovarian lottery feels uncomfortable but real. So much of life is decided before effort even begins. At the same time, we also see people rise from nothing and completely change their destiny through choices, discipline, and persistence.
Maybe success is neither fully luck nor fully hard work, but a combination of starting point + decisions. The question is: how much control do we actually have over our lives, and how much is already decided the moment we are born?
But democracy let's the baby deal with the diaper itself.
I learnt a lot of Western philosophy from him. He teaches geopolitical theories as well. Mainly discussing the current events, trying to understand behind the scenes.
I was critical of him in the beginning. But the more you watch his videos, he makes it clear to question all his positions, disagree and promote free thinking. He says he provides the creative thinking rather than the absolute truth.
Edit: those of you asking his name: Prof. Jiang Official YouTube channel: Predictive history
This was the first video of him that made me reevaluate a lot of my stances: The theory of everything
I am 17yo male currently struggling with my academics. What books i can read or philosophy i should adopt to grow or atleast get a better view of the world
I was sitting in garden today and i wrote my thoughts
We are all here trying to understand what life means each from our own perspective. Meaning is not something universal or fixed; it is deeply subjective.
No one can define the meaning of life for someone else, because every individual walks through different chapters, faces different battles, and gathers different truths along the way.
What feels meaningful to one may feel empty to another, and that’s not a flaw, it’s the design.
Perhaps life was never meant to have a single meaning. Perhaps the meaning lies in the way we choose to experience it, interpret it, and carry it forward.
In the end, life is not about discovering a pre-written purpose... it is about creating one that feels real to you.
Hello everyone ! I am 19 years old and I have a small project in progress: How do our lives influence the way we think ?
My goal is to average out the 10 most frequently asked spiritual/philosophical questions by humans, and then to propose them in a filmed interview to various specialists (philosophers, monks, scientists...) who will try to answer them. Problem: I need viable data!
So I created a Google Form (it’s free and it only takes 5 minutes!) that gathers information anonymously on different criteria previously chosen by me and which could, in my opinion, guide the spiritual and philosophical questions we ask ourselves every day. I did it in English, Spanish, and French, but I don’t know where to send these questionnaires except here. I put the links below, but if it's not allowed by the subreddit, let me know and I will remove them (I put the"self-promoting" flair just in case!).
By the way, don’t hesitate to give me feedback under this position to improve the project and share it as much as possible with different people (if you have time of course!), it would be a godsend to have thousands of participants ! I would also be happy to discuss the subject with you under this position, that’s the purpose of my approach !
The one in English : https://forms.gle/ALDyJZCAGeq3S1589
The one in Spanish : https://forms.gle/QFqmoFq6taVZTf1x7
The one in French : https://forms.gle/7YNoMqgbaaZkGskBA
Thank you for those who will take the time to participate !