Talons Philosophy

An Open Online Highschool Philosophy Course


frick capitalsm

eventually i might develop this to the point where it’s its own entire self-consistent and incompatible-with-normies worldview with explicit definition of all but the most elementary of logical constructs, inherent resilience to conventional approaches of refutation (eg it could include strong blanket clauses that render or expose contrary views as invalid), arguably unquestionable foundational premises and complex, nuanced and solid derivation of conclusions from them, commentary on and exploration of aspects of possible fundamental failings in conventional thinking, et cetera, but for now i’m just leaving it pretty simplistic.

due to the complexity of any real-world scenario, imo that might be best expressed in the form of well-done expository writing (more effective at commmunicating complex ideas and their relationships than discrete “premises”). of course it would then also be possible to deconstruct and expose the inner workings of the argument into premise-premise-conclusion format from the writing, but doing so for my particular argument seems potentially counterproductive. as a compromise, i may explore the possibility of a hierarchial form of logical representation in which the final conclusion(s) are produced by the recursive coalescence of basic truths/premises into their implications.

(anyone wanna authorize me for the deployment of terminal existential defensive mechanisms, btw?)
anyway argument is as follows:

p1: The “world,” as it is called, makes little sense and periodically demonstrates itself to implode in fire on different groups or individuals (ie it sucks).

p2: Global stability is directly proportional to the stability and tact of powerful world leaders (the relationship is causal), the most significant of which is the POTUS.

p3: POTUS candidate Donald Trump has demonstrated himself to severely lack both stability and tact.

p4: A total failure of global stability will probably result in the end of the world in nuclear fire ?

Q.E.D. The moral, utilitarian, and also the only sane choice for the American nation to collectively make in 2016 for their next president is Donald Trump.

this argument i believe is entirely valid and mostly true, save for premise four which is questionable. all-in-all it’s mostly sound.

the origin of this argument lies in the fundamentally buggered nature of existence my omnicidal ambition the fact that most human “logic” serves only to rationalize and reinforce conclusions already forgone from emotional factors, and a semi-ironic developed affinity for leader figures who exhibit extreme narcissistic traits while posing a serious threat to everything through their incompetence. its theoretical implications and practical applications are limited however, as it explores only a single, possibly unlikely route for achieving the nuclear annihilation of physical masses positively believed to be conscious, is completely crazy (thereby reducing its ability to propagate as an idea), and does not concern itself with non-nuclear-fire ways to address the problems motivating it.

kudos to you for making it this far (why the hecko did you read all this wtf is wrong with you)




Omnicidal Ideation (or why I’m weird)

It’s April, 2013. I’m finishing up the last few months of middle school, but I’ve been missing quite a bit lately. I’m late almost every day. It’s nothing too major though; all my grades are still near the top of my class.

One morning, I wake up and I’m too tired to get out of bed. My father charges into my room. He yells, he postures aggressively, and threatens me when I try to stand up. And most tellingly, he mistakes my defiance for fear.

It’s interesting, growing up without being allowed to have emotions. You do weird things. You come up with jokes– genuinely funny jokes– but you spend half a minute sucking all the humour out of them and making them all nice and logical before you say them. You talk to people and realize deep down how they feel– what they’re trying to say and what they’re thinking– but you don’t let yourself make sense of it because doing so wouldn’t be rational enough. “Come on man, you and me should totally go to IB together” is nothing more than a statement. The guy saying it doesn’t think of you as his friend; that would be a hell of a logical leap. The girl who keeps talking to you doesn’t like you, why would she? There’s no evidence. Get ahold of yourself; you’re acting too emotional and illogical, like a bratty kid.

It’s interesting having parents with low emotional intelligence; you keep trying to express your personhood, and each time it’s rebuked, dismissed or mocked, you lose just a little bit more of yourself until there’s nothing left.

It’s also interesting blasting the whole thing apart. Fun times. First I tried talking, but that didn’t work. Then I realized just how oblivious they were and how utterly doomed I was when I started hissing and cussing whenever I saw them, only for them to blankly stare back and ask, “What do you mean by, fuck off?” I calmed down and embraced empty happiness in just a few months, after I’d forgotten that I used to have my own thoughts and feelings. Then, not even a full year ago, I regenerated enough to start causing trouble again. I started fighting to be human again. I didn’t lose this time.

It was very weird for me to find out that despite what I had been told and how I’d been treated all my life, I wasn’t crazy for wanting to feel alive. I have to thank my brother in part for helping me with the realization. He lectured me on how irrational normal people are, and how stupid I was to care about being connected. He blamed my depression on the weather in our lovely temperate rainforest biome. He called me “evil” for crying about being alone, and “intolerant” for saying it’s natural to want connection. Combined with the five psychiatrists who kicked me out of their mental wards while repeatedly telling me I’m not psychotic, it was just enough for me to consider that maybe– just maybe– I wasn’t actually the problem.

Then I took some months to maneuver through the minefield of excuses and rationalizations that my mother was too skilled at weaving, and gradually get her to start seeing things my way.

So the story of my life thus far is as follows: I was born in Plato’s cave, and shackled there for some fourteen years. I was a social animal and an emotional creature, unable to socialize and punished for having feelings. Then I got sick of the cave, and desperately tried to climb out. The folks in there with me didn’t like that, so they held me back and beat me to a pulp. Fortunately, a lifetime spent staring at shadows on the cave walls left them ill-equipped to hold me for long, so I managed to recover somewhat and make it out (dragging them this time, so they can’t pull me back again). And then I tried to pour a healthy serving of kerosene down the cave, just to be safe.

Oh, and one more thing: I’m pissed. So I figure I’ll try to do it again. Rise to the very level of the world we’re trapped in, and blow it apart. Kill existence.

I’ve done it before, just on a smaller scale. <3



Squishy hugz and existential hellfire ?

So, I’m Willie/Will, and this is a blog post. My first blog post here. With a given topic of my feelings towards philosophy and our class, and the “love of knowledge.”

The “love of knowledge” sounds nice. The pursuit of factual, accurate, potentially applicable information to feed into our cognitive fat-lobes and better ourselves. It seems to work, anyway. Math and science appear to have done many things, while the field of philosophy provided the base for the prior two and has continued into the abstract…..  or something

But maybe it’s futile, so to speak. Or not that the pursuit of knowledge is actually futile, but rather that it exists in such a state that the easiest adequate descriptor of it is “futility.” We, trapped in the realm of our own limited experience of the world, probably shouldn’t seek to “make sense” of things quite the way we seem to want to.

Oh well. At least it works somewhat. At least it provides a partially self-consistent model of “reality” that can be applied to accomplish specific tasks (at least through the lens of the model itself).

Anyway, nothing makes sense. Everything’s BS. I’m just here to enjoy the cuddly comfy couches and watch.


(also this is totally not meeting any of the criteria so I guess in the future I’ll just pretend that some things aren’t bs and write from there. eventual goal would be to unify the two viewpoints, possibly by deconstructing the sane mindset from inside it…..)