My little view on the so-called philosophy

One of the philosophical statement that I want to make is, there's no absolute right and no absolute wrong in social values, and that any "philosophical question" on which such is based is simply a bias of one form or another..

For example, one guy thinks it is idealistic to maximize the happiness of the majority, and another guy thinks it is idealistic to protect the basic rights of every individual.. Then you can even think it is idealistic to maximize the sufferings of everyone including yourself.. Who tell you every person loves easy and comfortable life? They are just different views and simply have no common grounds to argue on and no common goals to aspire about.. You can't say which one is more moral.. And you can't use one view to refute another..

And when you do try to use counter-examples within the principles that are proposed to refute the same principles, and try to make them 自打嘴巴, it is both easy and difficult because of the arbitrariness of the words..

Words' arbitrariness allows such flexibility and that it is hopeless to have truth in matter as complex as moral ethics..

So, given the present state of philosophy, it appears no more than a word-jiggling game that if you are dull enough, you can be a player.

To me, the true philosophy should concern only with some well-defined yes-no questions, like Is there soul? Is there God? etc., or those matter-of-factness questions like What constitutes the differences between a living human and a dead body? How many human beings are there in the whole world at this moment? which would call for a concrete answer, unless you are dump enough to argue what is soul and what is god, and what is human being..

=====

Okay, time to go to bath and stop thinking about stupid matter like this..

=====

To make the above paragraphs less vulnerable, I must add that it is not the thinkers that are stupid, it is the game of the so-called philosphy that is stupid.. Great thinkers all made good stories to hear and good stuff to learn.. They were born because of the state of their society, and it is the method to put their views to practice that matters.. The results give the deciding factor of whether their views are beneficial to mankind or not..

There's no right or no wrong.. Which thinker(s) you happen to agree largely depend on personal experiences and sentiments, which mean it isn't that logical.. Put it this way, there is nothing known as logically sentimental..