Who can i read so i can be more like the guy on the right instead of on the left?

Who can i read so i can be more like the guy on the right instead of on the left?

Attached: c9jDIdT.png (889x592, 286K)

that image is literally camus' philosophy in "myth of sisyphus"

Stop reading, retard.

this tbqh

Attached: me-in-the-streets-vs-me-in-the-sheets-8445480.png (500x417, 101K)

You wanna be this guy on the right, dummy

Attached: toxic_person.png (840x578, 316K)

how is that the essence of philsophy

you can't win, that's why you need to philosophize so you can decide how you want to lose

fuuuuck whoah

Those words are from one of Kierkegaard's pseudonyms, not from Kierkegaard in propria persona. You may want to take them with a grain of salt, but they're still Kierkegaardy.

I remember a Del Toro interview where he discussed how Kierkegaard's philosophy influenced Pan's Labyrinth, particularly ideas like "A tyrant dies and his rule is over; the martyr dies and his rule begins" and the idea of choosing how you die. Unrelated just thought it relevant.

the right is just a farce nihilists use to look less pathetic. nihilists are weak and boring on the inside

Nihilism could be liberating as well.

It's not fucking neurotic activities like reading
you're a physical thing that exists in the physical world. If you get too much in your head and metaphysics you'll forget about it and probably stop popping boners.
Practice being the body as much as the mind, if only for fun if not profit.

SIEGE by James Mason

>he's never popped a metaphysical boner
>he will never experience his transcendant shiva-linga penetrate the triple yoni of the three worlds as he cums all manifestation out of his tremendously glorious pee pee hole

Reddit.

Attached: 1508636677225.png (1201x1423, 1.44M)

lazy and untrue

Stop caring about the difference about the two. Especially stop caring about what the perception of your actions will be thought of as.

isn’t what you say against all of ancient greek philosophy?

Max Stirner:

If God, if humanity, as you affirm, have enough content in them
selves to be all in all to themselves, then I feel that I would lack it
even less, and that I would have no complaint to make about my
"emptiness." I am not nothing in the sense of emptiness, but am the
creative nothing, the nothing out of which I myself create everything
as creator.

Away, then, with every cause that is not completely my affair. You
think that at least the "good cause" must be my affair? Which good,
which bad? I am myself my own affair, and I am neither good nor bad.
Neither makes any sense to me.

The divine is God's affair; the human cause is "humanity's." My affair
is neither the divine nor the human; it is not the good, the true, the just,
the free, etc., but only my own, and it is not general, but is-unique, as
I am unique.

For me, there is nothing greater than me!

Attached: Stirner.jpg (170x198, 12K)

>as Kant says
"Kant was wrong."
wow that was hard to refute
cringe @ur tiny intellectual capacity thinking that post is worthy of being saved

why do retards in general think philosofuckwits have anything worthwhile to offer the world?

Can you actually explain why Kant was wrong or do you just say he was because thinking he was right makes you uncomfortable with your life?

>Can you actually explain why Kant was wrong
Why the FUCK should I? That wanky cunt in the image never provided ANY reasoning as to why he was right.

who the fuck still smokes cigs inside