[bheadmaster]

As a run-of-the-mill mathematician and programmer, what I've found the most helpful is studying philosophy.

During my teens I went through an existential crisis, and the dread I've felt every day drove me to start reading philosophy books. I found Nietzsche, and while his books were extremely hard to read (took me years to actually go through them), I feel that it's shaped my mind in a universal way, giving me ability to "see through" all the abstractions and arbitrary rules set by various actors in this world, and focus on the fundamentals. Russell and Wittgenstein were the follow-ups, which further developed the sort-of-nihilistic view of Nietzsche into something that made more sense.

I feel it has helped me a lot with both general "smartness" and mathematics, so I'll recommend it too. Read philosophy.

[rramadass]

You might find James Tartaglia's Philosophy in a Meaningless Life A System of Nihilism, Consciousness and Reality interesting. Free pdf available at : https://www.bloomsburycollections.com/book/philosophy-in-a-m...

[dev_0]

Does Jordan Peterson helps?

[shrimp_emoji]

The poster said "philosophy", not "quacky neo-theologian mysticism from a psychology professor drifting out of his lane while coming off of benzos".

[bheadmaster]

Nietzsche was a filologist, and had a problem with opium.

If you want to criticize someone's philosophy, you need better arguments then ad-hominem.

[bheadmaster]

Jordan Peterson is impressingly insightful, and a great motivational speaker.

I wouldn't call him a philosopher, because philosophy to me must have a timeless element that is necessarily detached from any specific time or society, and Jordan is first of all a clinical psychologist, which makes his experience inherently tied to the current society through his practice with patients.

That being said, we are living in the current day, I think his lectures and books are very helpful for anyone struggling with the meaninglessness of modern life.

I also personally dislike his usage of Christian mythology and ethics in presenting the "how-to" of life. It might be useful as a narrative tool, but Christianity in itself is extremely toxic life-denying philosophy.

[kleer001]

> Christianity in itself is extremely toxic life-denying philosophy

Hmmm, you lost me there. Are you talking about the politics and practices of current American evangelical right wing Christians? I'd agree with you there.

But in light of how Peterson digests Christianity I'd say it's the exact opposite of your claim. "Pick up your damn cross." and "Clean your room." as exemplars of such.

[bheadmaster]

Christianity is a philosophy that is founded on guilt. The cardinal sin represents a general disdain of all humanity - everyone is guilty for being alive, for being sons and daughters of women and men. Everything else is a consequence of that disdain.

[kleer001]

While sin plays a crucial role in Christian doctrine, it does not mean that everyone is guilty for being alive or that Christianity promotes disdain for humanity. Christianity recognizes the inherent value and worth of every human being, as created in the image of God.

Furthermore, Christianity offers hope and redemption through faith in Jesus Christ, rather than promoting guilt. Sin refers to actions or thoughts that go against God's will, which can harm individuals and society. However, forgiveness and transformation are possible through faith in Jesus Christ.

Romans 3:23-24

[bheadmaster]

Yeah, Christianity is also full of internal contradictions, and has no strong framework in which one can logically cruise through it. One more reason why I dislike anyone using it in philosophical discussions.

> Christianity offers hope and redemption

Hope and redemption is only necessary if you think all humans are guilty by being alive and therefore hopeless.