- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
There is a good Telegram channel on philosophy, called Pastiche Project, where there is a lot of interesting things. I would advise you to think about ethics. Well, for example, about the fashionable topic of self-learning artificial intelligence, which has the ability to find patterns in large amounts of information that are not visible to the ordinary human eye. And so, for the good of humanity, this artificial intelligence, after calculating all possible scenarios, decides that the best solution for the good of all mankind is to destroy a certain number of people. What should humanity do in this case?
1. To be or to seem
More relevant than ever. Of course, I reflexively want to say that the answer is obvious: to be. We are all moralists, and all for the real, sincere, deep. But in fact, it is worth looking into your honest eyes and understanding how much the image of a person is now more significant than its essence. Instagram, other social networks, the way we carefully design our pages and make a selection of perfect photos-all this suggests that appearing is no less important than being. Seeming is about status, about being evaluated by society, and about respect as well. Being is about focusing on yourself, about the inner.�
2. Go with the flow or row against it
Again, we discard the condemnation of plankton. Because you can also go with the flow in the following way:
You want a lot of money, success, and growth inside your campaign. Therefore, you enter management and go for an internship in a large hipster office of Kaspersky, Google, and Votever. And sit there for five or ten years, not really creating problems for yourself and people.�
Or you are inwardly rebelling against the meaninglessness of being and working, which chronically does not satisfy you, and rowing against it, trying, perhaps, to build something of your own.�
3. Work to live or live to work
Also, in my opinion, an interesting and ambiguous thesis. On the one hand, many people believe that the presence on this planet should be justified by work: otherwise, why are you needed here? And then the meaning of life lies in the eternal search for usefulness, and the measure of happiness becomes the degree of significance for others. On the other hand, I have repeatedly encountered the position: “We are born to be happy.” Then work becomes a tool that allows you to live (provide yourself with the necessary benefits, pay for teachers, hobbies).�
In general, if you analyze conversations with friends, you can find a thousand and one controversial theses that will grow into a great topic for philosophical discussions. Good luck!